PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 499
[P ANDIT T HAKUR D AS B HARGAVA in the chair. ]
As I had pointed out in my speech the number of these castes in Delhi according to this list is sixtyfour. I have not suggested the inclusion of all that have been omitted. I have only suggested two, which are also present in the list here. I think it is very unfair that the Hon. the Law Minister should not accept it. But even if he is not prepared to accept it I want to press it and I hope all hon. members of this House will be pleased to vote with me, because this is discrimination pure and simple. For one purpose you have a notification in which certain castes are included. This notification holds good and neither the Law Minister nor the Government have taken any steps to disallow this list. Any boy who is born of any of these castes is entitled to apply, under this notification, styling himself as a scheduled caste. But here I do not know for what reasons the Hon. Dr. Ambedkar does not wish to include them. These two castes are here in this list—in this Gazette copy which any hon. Member may come and see. These petty fishermen who are called Dhinwars or Jhinwars—that name also is here—are here in this list, which is item 22 in this list. I hope therefore that irrespective of what the Hon. Dr. Ambedkar decides, the House will vote with me and see that these two castes who feel it keenly are not deprived of their privileges merely by a stroke of the pen. I hope therefore that the House will support me in this amendment of mine.
Shri Sidhva : May I know whether it is a Government of India publication?
Dr. Deshmukh: Yes. Dr. Ambedkar has got a copy of it.
Mr. Chairman : Amendment moved:
In clause 3, in the proposed Sixth Schedule, under the heading ‘Delhi’, at the end, add new entries:
“ 40. Nai (Barber).
- Dhiwar (fisherman)”.
Shri Sonavane : With reference to the amendment moved by my hon. Friend Dr. Deshmukh I think only such of the castes who are untouchables in the society……
An hon. Member: We have no untouchables now.