PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 399
miss the whole thing. Is there any other member wishing to move any other amendment ?
Shri Hiray (Bombay) : Yes, Sir.
Mr. Speaker: In addition to what the Law Minister is accepting ?
Shri Hiray: Yes.
Dr. Ambedkar: What has happened on account of the decision relating to Dangs is that one more seat has been added to Maharashtra and that seat belongs to the Tribal people. Therefore a seat has to be provided in the constituencies that have been delimited so far as Maharashtra is concerned. This is the proposal which stands in the name of Mr. Hiray. Either he may move it or I may move it.
Mr. Speaker: It is better if the Hon. Minister moves it.
Dr. Ambedkar: I beg to move:
In Table B, page 8, Nasik District, in column I, for the words “Nasik urban” and “Nasik rural cum Igatpuri”, substitute the words “ Nashik Igatpuri “and against the same constituencies.—
(1) In column 2, omit all the words beginning with “Nasik Municipal” and ending with “Iatpuri Municipal area” and substitute “Nasik and Igatpuri Talukas including all Municipalities therein”.
(2) In columns 3, 4, 5 omit the figurs given therein and substitute 3, 1, 1 instead respectively.
Shri Kanhayala Desai (Bombay) : There is a consequential amendment relating to Pardi. One scheduled tribe seat which is at present in Pardi Taluka should be removed and it should become a general seat.
Dr. Ambedkar: That becomes consequential. That you can do, Sir.
Mr. Speaker: Let it go on record that a specific point was raised.
- Mr. Speaker : The amendment of Dr. Ambedkar about Dangs. (as mentioned above).
The motion was adopted.
- P. D., Vol. 13, Part II, 9th June 1951, pp. 10534-35.