Vol. 15 · pages 431–435

414 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES 4. That in motion No. 2, at page 1 of the List, the entries relating to “Almora District (West)-cum -Garhwal District (East) ” be deleted. 5. That in motion No. 2, At page 2, the following be deleted. (i) The entries relating to “Kanpur District (North)-cumFarrukhabad District (South-East)- cum -Tehsil Etawah District (East)” to the two places where they occur. (ii) The entries relating to “Etawah District (West)”. (iii) The entries relating to “Kanpur District (South)” 6. That in motion No. 7, at page 6 of the List, the entries relating to “Kanpur City (South)”, “Kanpur (Central)”, “Ghatampur (West)-cum-Bhognipur (East) “and “Bhognipur (South-East)-cumAkbarpur (South) “be deleted. 7. That in motion No. 8, in the Appendix, item No. 17-A relating to Patwari circles of Meerut. Pargana be omitted. I withdraw amendment No. 3 in List No. 9. Amendment No. 3 in List No. 9 was, by leave, withdrawn. Mr. Speaker: So I am taking all of them together. Do the hon. Members wish to take any one of them independently ? If that is so I have no objecrion. Pandit Kunzru (Uttar Pradesh): I want to know what is the principle on which all these amendments have been accepted. I find that one of the amendments has been tabled by a member of the Committee, Shri T. N. Singh. I would, in particular like to know what that amendment is. Dr. Ambedkar: Those amendments on which there was general agreement were accepted. In regard to the particular amendment referred to by the hon. Member it is No. 14 in list No. 8. Pandit Kunzru : My Hon. friend Dr. Ambedkar says that those amendments have been accepted about which there was general agreement. I do not know what he means by “general agreement”. If he meant among the members of the majority party, obviously there could have been agreement on many other points. If that was the only basis on which the modifications

415PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES were to be made, there was no need for the appointment of a Delimitation Advisory Committee. But I should like to know whether apart from the fact that there was agreement on those points, there was any other reason for their acceptance. Dr. Ambedkar: Well, I think the Hon. House knows that we have been proceeding upon the basis of the decision of Members of the various Committees which were appointed by the Speaker to delimit the constituencies and whenever the Members have agreed to make a change, I have thought it fit to accept that change. No. 14 which I am accepting is one such amendment. Pandit Kunzru: Does he mean Members of the majority party or does he mean the Members of the Committee appointed by the Speaker ? Dr. Ambedkar : With regard to that, I should like to point out that so far as delimitation is concerned, no distinction has been observed between Members of the majority party and Members of any other party. All Members have been invited to place their views before this Cabinet Sub-Committee which was appointed to examine this matter. Any Member, irrespective of the party to which he belonged, had the freedom to come and plead his cause. Some Members did come. Shri T. N. Singh (Uttar Pradesh): Sir, as my name has been brought in I would ask your permission to say a few words. It is only this that the amendment to which my hon. friend referred is only a consequential amendment which should have been made and which by error was not made in the report of the Committee. I can explain the details personally to him, as it is not possible to explain it here. Mr. Speaker: Does any other Member wish to take up his motion independently? * Dr. Ambedkar: Sir, I hope this matter was discussed in the committee and I told Mr. Kapoor that his amendment was incomplete and therefore could not be accepted without * P.D., Vol. 12, Part II, 9th June 1951, p. 10607.

416 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES causing disturbance to other constituencies. He was not able to give a complete scheme where the thing would be fitted in with the rest. That is the reason why this amendment was not considered. Shri J. R. Kapoor: rose— Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member has no right of reply. Dies he wish me to put these to the House now ? Shri J R. Kapoor: Of course, though it may be rejected. Mr. Speaker: I shall place them before the House. Shri J. R. Kapoor: No. Sir, I would like to withdraw them. The amendments of Shri J. R. Kapoor were, by leave, withdrawn. Mr. Speaker: I will now put all the agreed amendments which the Law Minister has placed. All amendments were adopted. * Mr. Speaker: Has the Hon. Member, as also the other hon. Members who have moved amendments, the leave of the House to withdraw their amendments ? The amendments were, by leave, withdrawn. Mr. Speaker: That disposes of all the motions. Now I shall take up consequential amendments. Dr. Ambedkar: I beg to move: “ That with reference to the amendments to the Delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies Orders moved and accepted by the House necessary consequential, drafting and other formal changes be carried out in the said Orders under the authority of the Honourable the Speaker.” Dr. Deshmukh: I have given notice of a similar amendment. I beg to withdraw it. Mr. Speaker: It has not been placed before the House. So there is no need to withdraw it. *P.D., Vol. 12, Part II, 9th June 1951, pp. 10610-12.

417PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES Shri Chattopadhyay: I have an amendment to this amendment. I beg to move: In the Consequential Amendment standing in the name of Dr. Ambedkar, after the words “formal changes”, insert the words “including nomenclature of Constituencies”. Mr, Speaker: Does the Hon. Minister accept it ? Dr. Ambedkar: I cannot accept it in this formal and binding character. The Prime Minister (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru): I take it, Sir, that if a name is wrongly spelt it will be correctly spelt. That does not need a formal amendment. If there are minor errors I take it that they can always be corrected. Shri Chattopadhyay: There was good deal of discussion this morning over this and there was some difference of opinion too in this matter and Dr. Ambedkar said “Let this matter of nomenclature be left to the Speaker ”. Dr. Ambedkar: I admit. But I said if the Speaker thought that the change in nomenclature of a place is a formal change; then it will be covered by my amendment. Shri Chattopadhyay: It is for this reason that I have tabled this amendment. Mr. Speaker: What does he want me to do now ? Shri Chattopadhyay: I would like that after the words “formal changes” the words “including nomenclature of Constituencies” should be inserted. It is not formal. It is in my opinion very substantial, because in some cases……… Mr. Speaker: I understand his point. If he urges that it is a substantial thing, no amendment can now be made. If it is a formal or consequential amendment which will include also sometimes, as Dr. Ambedkar said, even a change in nomenclature, then matters will stand differently. Therefore it is no use having this amendment. Shri J. R. Kapoor: Do we take it that the change of the name of a constituency, if it does not materially or even slightly change the extent of the constituency, is covered by Dr. Ambedkar’s motion?

418 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. Ambedkar: It is in the discretion of the Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The House has accepted certain modifications. The House is going to give powers to the Speaker to make amendments of a consequential or formal character because, as was said, I believe, in the morning, there may be a misdescription of a boundary. Instead of “east” it might have been stated as “west”. Only such amendments will be put through. There can be no further amendments now. Even by the unanimous decision of the House the Chair cannot go beyond the decisions of the House. The Chair will do only what is absolutely necessary to give effect to the decisions already arrived at by the House. That is the spirit in which the consequential amendments will take place. zz