All these amendments are germane to the amendment just now moved by Dr. Ambedkar before the House, number 102 of list I (Third Week). These four amendment of mine fall into two categories. The first three are similar in nature and the last one is in another class. The first three seek to substitute certain expressions used in this article and thereby eliminate what I consider unnecessary and cumbrous verbiage. I do not know exactly whether in using expression “affairs of the Union or of a State“, the Drafting Committee has got something else in mind than service rendered by a person under the Government of the Union or of a State. The article refers to pensions payable to or in respect of a person who has served in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State. Naturally, if a person is entitled to some pension in connection with services rendered by him, I believe it must be under the aegis of the Government of the Union or of a State which is liable to pay the pension to him. Therefore, I feel that it is somewhat vague to use this expression “affairs of the Union“. What kind of affairs? The Union or a State may have all kinds of affairs. I suppose the article contemplates governmental affairs, and not any other affairs that may arise in connection with the Union or as between the Union and the constituent units. Therefore, this article must be clear; that is to say, it must specify, clarify and make it absolutely crystal clear that the services rendered by a person on account of which he will get a pension will be in relation to the Government of the Union or under the Government of a particular State.
