Vol. 15 · pages 156–160

139PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Some Hon. Members : We have not spoken as yet. Dr. Ambedkar : Notwithstanding the fact that so much heat and so much vehemence have been introduced in this debate ……… Shri Sondhi : You will have more of it. Shri Kamath : You are adding to it. Mr. Speaker : Order, order. Let him go on. Dr. Ambedkar : In the Constitution, there is a provision that delimitation shall be undertaken by Parliament. That is there. In this Bill, what we have proposed is that this power which belongs to Parliament may be delegated to the President, and the President may, by order, prescribe what the constituencies are. It may be contended—and very rightly too—that this matter ought not to be left to the President but that this Parliament should engage itself in looking into every constituency that may be framed for the purpose of both the elections to the Parliament and to the State Legislatures. I do not deny the right, but the question is whether Parliament can and will be able to find the enormous time that will be necessary for scrutinising every constituency both for the Parliament and for the State Legislatures. Dr. Deshmukh : That is not the only course. Dr. Ambedkar : Please let me go on. Therefore, in this particular clause 13, the provision is made that although the President may, by order, prescribe and delimit constituencies he shall be bound to place the order of delimitation before the House. I may frankly state that even I am not satisfied with this provision, because I want Parliament to have a look into it. But nobody has suggested this. (Interruption). This is one point which the Select Committee may look into, I agree. But why go to the Select Committee for this kind of thing ? I have a solution. I have two alternatives. One is that clause 12 may be so amended that we can add that the order of delimitation made by the President should be placed before Parliament and if Parliament

140 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES does not make any alteration in it, then within a prescribed period it should become final. That is one alternative. The other alternative which I am prepared to propose is that when delimitation is undertaken, whoever delimits, there shall be associated with him a Committee composed of Members of this House or of the local State Legislature who are concerned with that particular constituency, so that they may be in a position to give their advice and their judgment to the officer who is engaged in delimitation. ( Shri Tyagi : That is a good idea.) If the House is agreeable to that, there is no need to refer this Bill to a Select Committee at all. Then, Sir, the other point that remains in the Bill is this. I do not think that I am accusing anybody in saying what I do, namely, that a large part of the heat and vehemence and the general plausible argument that have been engendered have been intended merely to cover a very small point, namely, that most hon. Members are interested in having the number of seats in the State Legislatures increased, but they have not had the courage to say so, except one or two. If hon. Members are only interested in this little point that the number for the U.P. should be increased by 15 or that the one for Mysore should be increased by 1 or that the one for Delhi should be increased by 2, I want to ask whether it is not a matter which we can deal with in this House ? Why bother with a Select Committee ? Shri Bhatt : You cannot deal with all the details. Dr. Ambedkar : There are no details. I am myself moving certain amendment changing the figures in the total representation of the various States. If my hon. friends think that I am very miser and meagre and that I am not meeting their demands, well, they can move their amendments right here and the House may decide whether the figure that I suggest is the right figure or whether the figure that they suggest is the right figure. Why send it to the Select Committee ? Where is any other thing in this Bill, I want to know, which the Select Committee can deal with? This is a routine Bill.

141PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES My hon. Friend Mr. Hossain Imam said that there were certain matters which were not included in this Bill. I think that he forgot what I had stated when I made my observation on the introduction of this Bill. I had stated then that this Bill deals with only one aspect of the election. The conduct of election as such is quite a different matter and will be dealt with by another Bill. Consequently, all those matters which appear to be absent here are not going to remain absent, because the elections cannot be completed and carried on unless the complementary part of the legislation is also put through. Therefore, my submission is that although there is no motion—and you said that a motion can very well be manufactured if one is wanted ;—quite true that it can be— but is there any necessity ? That is the point which I want the House to consider. These are the three points and I have the amendments ready with me. REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL —concld. * Mr. Speaker : The House was proceeding yesterday with the consideration of the following motion : “That the Bill to provide for the allocation of seats in, and the delimitation of constituencies for the purpose of elections to, the House of the People and the Legislatures of States, the qualifications of voters at such elections, the preparation of electoral rolls, and matters connected therewith, be taken into consideration.” Shri Syamnandan Sahaya : ………Now that the Law Minister is here I hope he will place before you the facts as transpired this morning and then we may proceed to consider the Bill clause by clause. The Minister of Law (Dr. Ambedkar) : I am sorry, Sir, that I was late. At your suggestion there was a meeting held this morning under the chairmanship of the Deputy Speaker of such Members of the House as were interested in this Bill and I am glad to say that we have unanimously accepted certain amendments to this Bill which I propose to move with your permission. I hope that there will be no further controversy or debate on the subject. * P.D. Vol. 4, Part II, 20th April 1950, pp. 3057-58.

142 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Shri Tyagi (Uttar Pradesh) : I have not been accommodated. I agree with the amendments, but my points have not been accommodated and my amendment has not been accepted. Therefore, it was not ‘unanimous’. Mr. Speaker : Whatever the reasons, the conclusion seems to be unanimous. I shall put the conisderation motion to the House and then we can take the Bill clause by clause. I must congratulate the Members on the very happy end that has been brought about. The question is : “That the Bill to provide for the allocation of seats in, and the delimitation of constituencies for the purpose of elections to, the House of the People and the Legislatures of States, the qualifications of voters at such elections, the preparation of electoral rolls, and matters connected therewith, be taken into consideration.” The motion was adopted. Mr. Speaker : We may now proceed with the Bill clause by clause. Dr. Ambedkar : There is an amendment to clause 13 and I would therefore like that clause to be held over because the amendment is being typed. Mr. Speaker : All right, I take it generally that the previous amendments tabled by hon. Members are all scrapped. * Dr. Tek Chand (Punjab) : Unfortunately we have not seen the wording of the amendments in respect of what we decided in the morning. There was only a general talk. And with regard to some of the clauses, for instance with regard to clause 6, there is still a great deal of controversy and there is no unanimity. Dr. Ambedkar : There is no controversy. Mr. Speaker : I do not at all want to exclude any amendment tabled. I was trying to clarify the position so that if there are no amendments I shall take those clauses together. Dr. Tek Chand : What are the new amendments ? Let us see them. Nobody has seen them. Without seeing them how can we pass them? *P. D., Vol. 4, Part II, 20th April 1950, p. 3058.

143PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Dr. Ambedkar : I will read them. Mr, Speaker : Has the hon. Member, Dr. Tek Chand, any amendments to move? Dr. Tek Chand : We have sent an amendment to clause 6. Clauses 2 to 5 Mr. Speaker : Is any hon. Member desirous of moving any amendment to any of the clauses 2 to 5 ? Some hon. Members : None. Clauses 2 to 5 were added to the Bill. *Shri Buragohain (Assam) : May I submit before the Hon. Minister replies ………. Dr. Ambedkar : I do not want any suggestions. Mr. Speaker : The better course will be to know the reactions of the Law Minister. Shri Buragohain : Sir, the case of the Tribals of Assam stands on a different footing. I have to …….. Mr. Speaker : The better course will be to hear the Hon. Minister first. Do the hon. Members want me to place this amendment at this stage, or shall I place it later ? All right, I shall place it later. Dr. Ambedkar : I regret very much that I cannot accept either of the amendments moved by Mr. Jain or by Mr. J. R. Kapoor. But, I do want to remove any kind of suspicion that there might be in the mind of Mr. Jain or Mr. Kapoor or of any other Member of Parliament. It seems to me that they are under a misapprehension that by clause 6 Parliament is going to be completely deprived of the right to determine what should be the nature of the constituency : whether it should be single-member constituency or plural member constituency; what should be the method of voting, * P. D., Vol. 4, Part II, 20th April 1950, p. 3062.