602 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Dr. Ambedkar: In this case I will accept my hon. friend’s amendment.
Shri. T. T. Krishnamachari: As regards scrutiny of nominations, may I point out, Sir, that direction may be given that clause 28(c) which has been passed by this House may be suitably amended in the third reading ?
Dr. Ambedkar: Yes, I have another amendment also to move at that, stage.
Mr. Chairman: I will now put Mr. Sahaya’s amendment to vote. The question is:
In sub-clause (4) of clause 34, for the word “refuse” substitute the word “reject”.
The motion was adopted.
- Dr. Deshmukh : I beg to move :
In sub-clause (4) of clause 34, after the word “substantial” insert the words “and vital”. .
Sir, the reason why I wish that the words “or vital” should be added is, the meaning of the word substantial is not very definite. I referred to the dictionary and found a variety of meanings attached to the word ‘substantial’. It can mean having substance, material, stout, strong, bulky, real, solid, conforming to what is essential, involving essential etc.
Dr. Ambedkar: What is the meaning of vital ?
Dr. Deshmukh: That which will affect the candidature in a very direct and a vital manner.
I have also an alternative to suggest which I hope the Hon. Minister will accept. If we omit the words “which is not of a substantial character” that will serve the purpose—that is, if we merely say that the Returning Officer shall not refuse any nomination paper on the ground of any technical defect. By the addition of the words “which is not of a substantial character” we make it still more ambiguous and give scope for interpretation in different ways. Hence I suggest that
*P.D., Vol. 12, Part II, 19th May 1951, pp. 9166-67.