830 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
class of persons ? Lastly, when the question comes up whether these amendments are admissible or not, just as my friend Mr. Jaspat Roy Kapoor has said, I would request that we should be given an opportunity to explain our position.
- Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : Sir, as regards the amendment moved by the Hon. Dr. Ambedkar, I raised at that time a point of order. I should first of all try to explain my point of order, because the other amendments depend upon that point of order. You will be pleased to notice that this amendment is drafted in a language which is highly insulting to the House. It says “In clause
2, in sub-clause (1), in item (a), for “Hindus, that is to say, to all persons professing the Hindu religion” substitute ‘persons who are Hindus’ and so on and so forth. In the next item the wording is “substitute” something. In part (2) it is again “omit” something. This is expressed in the imperative form. As Dr. Pattabhi on one occasion said, Dr. Ambedkar speaks in a professorial and dictatorial tone. This amendment is couched in that language. Not merely this, but all the amendments. I have examined one and all of them. They are in the form of correction slips, or orders by a superior officer of Government to his subordinates. So this is really a direction to the House to do this and that, imperatively. The usual form is that “for such and such thing the following shall be substituted” or that “the following shall be omitted”. That is the form. I submit that the drafting has been done so carelessly and so much in the official style that they cannot be accepted as setting a new standard of courtesy to the House. All the amendments are couched in that language. I seriously ask the House to consider whether this method of wording the amendments will be acceptable at all. I, therefore, like in some of the amendments to cure this imperious form. I have suggested the usual form. And it is not merely the usual form in this House but in the previous House and in all other legislative bodies. The question is whether we should permit the setting up of a new standard entirely its own. You will be pleased to examine all the amendments and they are all couched like this. The point of order which I submit is whether it is in good form. If it is not, then the next amendment which I have submitted to cure this should be accepted in preference to this. Nothing will be lost but everything will be gained in decorum and official form. Sir, I ask you to give a ruling on this point.
- P.D., Vol. VIII, Part II, 5th February 1951. pp. 2404-23.