Vol. 15 · pages 476–480

459PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES to confine myself to one or two points to which some hon. Members have already referred, because I think this is the only proper occasion to ventilate some feelings regarding Scheduled Castes as the same was done by others. Not only this House, but the whole country is abundantly interested in the problems of the Scheduled Castes. Many of us who represent these classes in this House would not have been here but for the great work done under the leadership of the Father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi. At the same time, I must not omit to mention the great services that have been rendered by our great leader Dr. Ambedkar. I think Mahatma Gandhi, Mr. Jinnah and Dr. Ambedkar are the three personalities who have commanded the greatest admiration... Shri Sonavane : And have divided the country. Shri R. Velayudhan : ...and respect of the people and who have been able to shape the destinies and thoughts of people in this century. Shri Sonavane : On a point of order, is all this relevant to the Bill? Shri R. Velayudhan: Yes. Mr. Chairman: The hon. Member who raised the point was heard uninterrupted. I think he would extend the same privilege to other Members also. Shri Sonavane : My point of order has not been decided. Mr. Chairman: The hon. Member may go on. Shri R. Velayudhan: I am not going to enter into any controversial point. But, I must say that the Hon. Dr. Ambedkar who has brought this Bill as well as the greatest of political saints Gandhiji, who have done the greatest service to the down-trodden millions, the Scheduled Caste people, have got their respective places in the hearts of many in the country. Therefore, I think it was not proper on the part of some hon. Members to take this opportunity to fling a little mud on a leader who has got the greatest following among the Scheduled Castes even at this time.

460 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES As regards the origin of this Bill I must say that the provision for the representation of Scheduled Castes in the Part C States was contemplated long, long ago. Even though the Constitution was framed by the greatest jurists and lawyers including the Hon. Law Minister, it is a matter of surprise that they completely forgot to include representation for the Scheduled Castes in the Part C States at the proper stage. There was a lot of heart-searching and there were lot of constitutional difficulties to overcome with regard to the formulation of this Bill which seeks to give representation to the Scheduled Castes of the Part C States. There was controversy as to whether this Bill was a proper measure or not and an hon. Member even spoke yesterday in this House sounding a discordant note to the effect that there should not be any reservation of seats for the Scheduled Castes in Part C States. As for myself, I have believed and used to say even from my school days that the reservation of seats and other kinds of reservations are no panacea to the ills under which the Scheduled Castes are labouring. On that point I had my own differences with Dr. Ambedkar also. But at the same time, when you have given reservation in the Parts A and B States, it would be unjust to deny it to those in Part C States,—people who are not represented in Parliament or in the respective local bodies. As Dr. Deshmukh has said, there is a lot of omission and there are many mistakes in the formulation of these lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, not only in the Bill that is before us, but also in the order of the President for Parts A and B States. I looked into the proceedings of the Constituent Assembly touching on this point and I find that it was stated then that the list already fromulated in the 1935 Act would be accepted when it comes to the question of elections under the new Constitution. But when the President’s order came out, so many castes included in that Act were excluded and we have now only a few of these Scheduled Castes and Tribes in almost all the Parts A and B States. I feel that this was not done without a purpose. This I think, was done deliberately. I mean this omission or reduction in the number of names in the list, because if they had included

461PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES all those Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes that were in the Act of 1935, then the number of reserved seats would become very large. In some of the States, for instance in the Uttar Pradesh where there are 13 lakhs of Khatiks, they have been completely ignored in the President’s list. If they are included, I think nearly 40 per cent of the seats in U. P. would go to the Scheduled Castes alone. And that is not a small thing that they should get this much in a Part A State and be able to influence the destinies and the politics of the State. Therefore, intentionally and specially and deliberately they have been excluded so as to minimise the representation of the Scheduled Castes in the State. That is the case not only in the U. P. but in some other States also. But in most of the South Indian States they have drawn up the list according to the 1935 Act. Therefore, the whole list has to be re-formulated and the promise given by the late Sardar Patel in the Constituent Assembly that the list of 1935 Act would be accepted in Parliament for the coming election, must be kept, injustice to the departed leader and also to the Father of the Nation and also to the millions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who have been enjoying certain privileges on the basis of caste or community. According to the present arrangement alone can do that. For instance, I am from Madras, cannot go and contest a seat in any other State, say in Bombay. Therefore, there is this constitutional difficulty also which has to be removed by Parliament as Parliament alone can do that. For instance, I belong to the Travancore-Cochin State and so I cannot go to Bombay and contest a seat there, and that is a discrimination against my community, because non-Scheduled Castes can freely contest any seat anywhere in India according to party basis or on any other basis. Therefore it is my request not only to the Government but also to Parliament to rectify these constitutional anomalies as soon as possible. My submission is that most of the castes dropped from the former list will have to be included and a fair list drawn up so that the reservation given to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes may be on a just and fair basis. Otherwise let us drop the thing altogether and we will fight our battles on equal footing with

462 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES the rest. I have got great hope for the future and I believe in a bright future for my community. They are the downtrodden and the future is for the under-dog. Therefore, I am not hopeless. I am not without hope. Dr. Ambedkar might feel pessimistic, but as far as I am concerned, and as far as the youths of the Scheduled Castes are concerned, we have courage enough to fight on equal footing our battle of liberation. Mr. Chairman: Order, order. Is the hon. Member opposing the Bill or supporting it? Shri R. Velayudhan: I am not opposing this Bill at all, but only requesting that the list drawn up should be changed where necessary after verification with actual facts. With this request, I support the Bill. Shri Deshbandhu Gupta (Delhi): I rise to support this Bill. The Bill merely seeks to ensure representation of Harijans in the House of the People from the Part C States and there can be no objection to this from any part of the House. But I would like to point out that the reason given by Dr. Ambedkar the Mover of this Bill that this was not defined when the Representation of the People Bill was before this House does not seem to be quite correct. This reservation is after all a temporary reservation for a period of ten years and perhaps it was thought desirable to leave out some areas without this reservation so as to see whether Harijans could be returned to the House of the People without reservation. (An Hon. member: Very doubtful.) My friend says very doubtful. I am not prepared to have a bet with him on that. But I can say that so far as Delhi is concerned I would like the Mover of the Bill and other friends to realise that Delhi and Ajmer were the only two places, even under the old regime, which enjoyed joint electorates, whereas throughout the country there were separate electorates and reservations of seats on that basis. I need hardly remind the hon. Mover and other friends who feel like him that Delhi had returned to the Central Assembly through joint electorate, the candidate belonging to the minority community and that too in the teeth of opposition from reactionary elements. Although opposition

463PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES forces from all parts of India were concentrated in Delhi to oppose the Muslim candidate put up by the Congress, Delhi was able to uphold the principle of joint electorates and had returned the minority community candidate. I would have considered it a privilege if Delhi and other Part C states were allowed the opportunity to return Harijan candidates without reserving seats for them. That would have given us also an idea as to what will happen after ten years when all such reservations will go. But my friend the Mover of the Bill, who unfortunately has always held a different view, has thought it fit to bring this Bill. Now that the Bill has been brought forward I support the Bill, for there can be no opposition either in principle or in substance so far as this Bill is concerned. I would however like to make one or two observations. Reference has already been made by more than one Member to the speech which was delivered by the Hon. Minister the other day. I do not wish to make any comments on that but for his information I would like to point out that delhi was the headquarters of the All-India Dalitodhar Sabha, even before the congress had included the removal of disabilities of the depressed classes in its programme in 1921. This Sabha was founded by the late Revered Swami Shraddhanand. It was he who had moved the resolution in 1920 in Calcutta Session of the Congress to include the removal of disabilities of Harijans in the Congress programme. Even earlier in his address as Chairman of the reception committee of the Indian National Congress session held at Amritsar after the Jallianwala Bagh tragedy, he had raised the question of the disabilities of the Harijans and had persuaded the Congress to recognise its importance. It would have been in the fitness of things if the Hon. Minister who undoubtedly has worked for the uplift of Harijans and holds a very high place as a Harijan leader, had recognised this fact. But unfortunately his policy and his angle of vision have been quite different. If I were to refer to the history of the struggle for the uplift of the Harijans in Delhi........ Mr. Chairman : I would invite the attention of the hon. Member to the fact that, when the hon. Speaker was in the