The definite suggestion is this. For the sake of Dr. Ambedkar, I shall state my point again. My complaint in regard to article 16 is this. There is no right which has been taken out of the province of the legislature, either of the Union or of the States, to say that a fundamental right has been reserved in article 16. Because, you will find it is stated here, “Subject (leaving alone reference to article 244) to the provisions of any law made by Parliament, trade and commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India shall be free”. You see the right is subject to any law made by Parliament without any restrictions whatsoever. You have secured the sovereignty of the Parliament in respect of this subject, and Parliament can do anything. To be a fundamental right, it should have been taken out of the province of the legislatures, either of the Union or of the States. I find there is left no residue of any right which could not be touched either by Parliament or by the State legislature and as such, it would not properly come under the Chapter on Fundamental Rights. It may be a matter of allocation of powers between the Parliament and the State legislatures in saying that the Parliament alone shall deal with subjects relating to free trade within the territories of India. We can as well put in entry 73 of List I. You canal so make some restriction in entries 32 and 33 of List II, that it shall be subject to matters relating to free trade in India. I would request the Honourable mover, to enlighten me whether, as a matter of fact, there is any right left which has been taken out of the province of the legislatures and the Government and whether it will be proper to have article 16 here, in this chapter dealing with fundamental rights.
