PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 593
Now, we have in our experience found that sometimes the Returning Officers take queer views. Otherwise many difficulties in the matter of these nominations would not have arisen and there might not have been so many election petitions and cases. I therefore desire to clarify the position by adding the words “ for the reserved seats” after the word “candidate”.
Mr. Chairman : Has the hon. Member seen the words “to fill that seat” in the proviso ?
Shri Syamnandan Sahaya : Yes, Further on also it is said “for which the seat has been so reserved”. I have seen all that. But I am suggesting the addition just to clarify the matter, because after all wherever there is a reservation there is one seat reserved and the other is a general seat. So if we add these words it appears to me to be a little clearer.
Dr. Ambedkar : There is no ambiguity and no such clarification is necessary.
Shri Syamnandan Sahaya : Then I will not press it.
Pandit Munishwar Datt Upadhyay (Uttar Pradesh) : I do not wish to move my amendment No. 317 in the Consolidated List but I want to make a suggestion to the Hon. Minister which he may accept.
My submission is that the phrase “and who is not subject to any disqualification mentioned in section 16 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950” is redundant and absolutely unnecessary ........... Why should we have so many words and so many lines unnecessarily although they do not add anything to the meaning ? That is what I would like to submit.
Dr. Ambedkar : It is an economy measure, I understand.
Pandit Munishwar Datt Upadhyay : As a matter of fact these words are absolutely unnecessary, because if he is an elector then he is not disqualified in that manner. Because that is the qualification of an elector given in the section to which it refers, that is section 16 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. So I submit that it is absolutely redundant.