What is the harm, why should we suspect the motive even if the period, six months or one year, is not mentioned at all? A body which can enact a law can also de-act it. Especially when particular care is taken to see that there is no encroachment on the rights of the subjects, there is no reason to think that there will be occasion for interference. If a neighbouring State feels that the situation in the adjoining State is adversely affecting its administration it should move the Centre to intervene, by such legislation as will improve the peace and prosperity of the whole of India. I submit that the original clause seems to be much better than the amendment moved by Dr. Ambedkar. The amendment of Dr. Ambedkar does not improve the meaning of the article or the intent of the Constituent Assembly. If the period is to be first six and then another six months it will needlessly lead to extra expenditure and delay matters.
