PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 415
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.