PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 689
(b) a person serving under the Government of any State shall include a patwari, chaukidar, dafedar, lambardar, zaiidar, shanbagh, karnam, talati, talari, patil, village munsif, village headman or any-other village officer, by whatever name he is called, employed in that State whether the office he holds is a whole-time office or not, but shall not include any person (other than any such village officer as aforesaid) who has been declared by the State Government to be a person to whom the provisions of this clause shall not apply.”
Mr. Chairman: Amendment moved :
These are all agreed amendments
*** Mr. Chairman :** Amendment moved :
In the amendment proposed by Dr. Ambedkar, in part (b) of the proposed Explanation to part 8 of clause 122, omit the words “Patil, village headman or any other village officer”.
Shri Kamath : I have got amendments in supplementary list No. 3 to Consolidated List No. 2. I have got several amendments there but I will move only one of them. In Supplementary list No. 6 to Consolidated List No. 2 also I am moving only one of my amendments. And in supplementary list No. 6 to Consolidated List No. 2 also I have several amendments, but I am moving only one. I am not moving the rest. That is to say. I shall move amendment No. 5 in supplementary list No. 3 to Consolidated List No. 2, amendment No. 3 in supplementary list No. 4 to Consolidated List No. 2, and amendment No. 2 in supplementary list No.
6 to Consolidated List No. 2.
I will take No. 6 in supplementary list No. 3 first. I beg to move :
(i) In part (a) (ii) of the Proviso to part (2) of clause 122, for the words “an object of divine displeasure or spiritual censure”, substitute the words “a victim of a divine curse’.
Dr. Ambedkar: I do not understand the difference between the two.
Shri Kamath: Now, Sir, I would like to point out that this apparently has been taken from the English law on the subject and also perhaps from the Indian Penal Code which
*P. D., Vol. 12, Part II, 28th May 1951, pp. 9582-83.