PREVIOUS

VP/3.00/3a

DR. ANBUMANI RAMDOSS (CONTD.): Shri Perumal was talking about the achievements made in Tamil Nadu, and what happened in Tamil Nadu about the Cradle Baby Scheme. In some districts in Tamil Nadu like Dharmapuri and Salem this trend has reversed. In Dharmapuri and Salem districts, at one time, infanticide and foeticide was the highest in the country. In the Dharmapuri district, both infanticide and foeticide was there. But over the past 10 to 15 years, a lot of awareness concepts have been taking place in these districts and, today, there has been an increase in the trend in these districts.

Mr. Shahid Siddiqui was very right in saying that on the one side the country is developing at a rapid pace, there is economic development, and on the other hand, we have a declining sex ratio and the number of women is declining. He was right in saying that there is not only health problem but there is a social problem. He was saying that the middle classes and the lower middle classes were the ones who have been doing this. But, not only this, even the upper classes and the very rich have been doing this. Only the lower strata of society are the ones who have not indulged much, much into this activity. This is according to the report which has come from the Ministry. He was also right about dowry. He wanted an inter-ministerial committee to be set up. It is a good suggestion. We will try to consider that according to the logistics. We have already co-opted the WCD Department. In fact, hon. Minister, Mrs. Renuka Chowdhury, is going to be the Co-Chair. We are going to announce it in the CSB meeting on June 14. So, we are going to have more interaction.

Prof. Alka Kshatriya mentioned about dowry and marriage. We all accept that it is an accepted fact. She was giving a startling figure about the Patel community where there are about only 525 girls for thousand boys. We will, definitely, look into this issue. It is a startling figure which has been mentioned. If she could give more details about the area where it is there, we can, definitely, take a lot more action. She was saying that the law should be more pro-active. Yes, I agree, we need a little more changes. Sir, we are involving religious leaders and political leaders. I have also participated in a lot of programmes involving religious, local leaders also.

Prof. Ram Deo Bhandary was also saying about comparing the States, the better performing with the other States, where the problem is there in better performing States. He was worried about licences. We are saying that we are going very strict in the licence pattern also. He was also concerned about the implementation of the law.

Mr. Gandhi Azad has said that law should be implemented fully. Yes, I accept it. I am with him. If there is a need for change, we are, definitely, we want to prevent that happening, we will, definitely, go through that.

Mrs. Sushila has mentioned about tribal areas about which I have already mentioned. She wanted to know how many NGOs have been represented on these committees. Definitely, I will tell her how many NGOs are there on these committees.

Sir, definitely, I would like to assure the House, through you, that we have initiated the girl child campaign to save the girl child with Miss. Sania Mirza, Ms. Aruna Keshavan and recently Ms. Jyostna Chinnappa, and we are having a lot of programmes at the school level. They have been the brand ambassadors. They have been going around. In the visual and print media a lot of awareness concepts have been going on. But, again I come back to the same point that this is not enough because only the Health Ministry is doing this. In fact, the hon. Prime Minister and Mrs. Sonia Gandhi have been more proactive and said that all the Ministries should take a more positive view on this. Cutting across all political parties, they should come forward.

Mrs. Brinda Karat was saying that it should be taken at the national mission level. That suggestion is well taken. Definitely, we will take it at that level. With these words, once again I would like to assure the House, through you, Sir, that we are giving more than hundred per cent commitment to this issue. This is a very, very emotive and social issue. This is a development issue in the sense that our country's future depends on how we tackle this issue. We are going at it very, very seriously. The support and advice of all the hon. Members, we will see how well we could still further strengthen this Act, and find out the ways and means how we could prevent these things from happening. Thank you, Sir. (Followed by PK/3b)

3B/HMS-PK/3.05

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The reply was very exhaustive...(Interruptions).. The hon. Minister has invited all of you to the 14th June meeting. All questions can be addressed there. The hon. Minister has made an open invitation to all the Members of Parliament.

ߴ֟ ׾֯־ : ָ, ֮ ױ֮օ

ֳ֯ן : ױ֮ , ה

ߴ֟ ׾ֲ֯ (ֻ֓ Ϥ) : ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֮֮ ״׮Ù ־ ֵ וִ ֜-׻ ߕ , ״֛ ߙ Ӿ , ָ ֮ ? ָ, ָ ֮־֛ ߴ Ӿ , ׻֋ ֯ ӲӬ ևӛ ߙظ ִ ֵ֮ ? (ִ֯)

ㇵ (֬ Ϥ) : , ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֳ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ־ֲ ֣ ָ פ , ׻֋ ֮־֤ , ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֟ ֈӛ ָ ָ ֵօ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֈӛ ָ ָ ֵօ ֻ -֯ ֻ ָ ֟ ֨ן ״ֵ , ָ ֈӛ ָ ָ ֵ (ִ֯)

ߴ֟ ֵ (֬ Ϥ) : ֳ֯ן , ӡ ׻֋ ָ י ֮, ָָ ָ ֮ ֮, ֮ ܟ ֻ֮ ׻֋ ϵ ֋ ָ ֮ ָ ִ ֕ וֻ ßָ ָ כ ױָ , ֮ ֵݮÙ ֱֻ ִֻ ָ ָ֤֟ ִֻ ָ֮ ־֕ ־ 0000 ׻ ֮ ֺ ִֻ 0և0ָ0 ֮ וִ וֻ כ ׬ָ ׻ ׬ָ ֮ ָ וֻ כ ׬ָ , ֵԿ ߅ ֵݮÙ ״ֻ ֟ ִֻ ָ֮ ־֕, ָ ׿ֵ֟ ֮ ־֕ ָ ֵԾ ֻ ִֻ ָ ֮ þֵ ֚ ֋ ױ ו֮֟ ִֻ , ־և ֻ ִֻ ײ֟ , - ֟ ׻֋ ִֻ ׮Ե ֻ

, ֯ פ ָ ֮֟ 75 ִֻ 69 ִֻ ׸ ֵ߅ ֈӛ ֿ߮ ӕ ֮ 69 ִֻ ֲ ײ֮ ӕ ֻ ֲ 0000 ӕ ׮־ֵ ӡ ֯ , ָָ ׻֋ ָ 69 ײ֮ ӕ ֻ ָ ֵ ֋, ָ ֯ ֮ (ִ֯)

DR. ANBUMANI RAMDOSS: Sir, the hon. Member has asked whether any study has been done about the affluent or the educated masses. There has been a study done in Delhi as compared to Indian figures, about the illiterate and literate mothers. It pertains to just a part of the answer to the question put by the hon. Member. As regards education of mother at primary level, the sex ratio in India is 909; in Delhi, it is 904. At middle level, it is about 894 in India, and in Delhi, it is 859.

(Contd. by 3C/PB)

PB-PSV/3C/3.10

DR. ANBUMANI RAMDOSS (CONTD.): And, where the mother is metric, in India, it is about 885, and the Delhi's figure is 825; and where the mother is a graduate, in India, the figure is 867, and Delhi's figure is 797; and where the mothers are graduate and above, India's figure is 876 and Delhi's figure is 815. Sir, this is just one small study. But, then, if there are more studies, definitely, I will give it to the hon. Member. For more details, Sir, I would say that for the first time we have the Annual Report, the first Report of the implementation of the Preconception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, and all Members of Parliament will be given a copy of this. We will be giving it to all Members, and all the information about individual districts, district-wise, has been there till last level, as to what is the ratio, what steps are being taken, and what is the involvement, etc. Other information like addresses and phone numbers of all the appropriate authorities at the district level has also been given in this Report. That means, everything has been given there. I think, we will take it up.

With regard to the observation of the hon. Member that at the local level, the District Magistrate and the Police, sometimes, are hand in glove with the doctors, I would say that again there is money power in individual district, and, for this, I would like to say that the body should be strengthened more so that authority shouldn't play a major role in the structure as such. So, the sensitisation is going on at the Police level, at the judicial level, at the Magistrate level, and at the district level. We are also trying to strengthen the existing law and give more teeth to the appropriate authorities, so that they could take a decision on that. So, I think, in the next meeting, we will be taking a decision to see how we could proceed further in this regard. ...(Interruptions)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Are you aware that sixty-nine machines are not registered in Delhi? That is the major point that she has raised.

DR. ANBUMANI RAMDOSS: Sir, I am not aware of it. I will definitely look into this issue. ...(Interruptions)... (Ends)

BILL INTRODUCED

THE APPRENTICES (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2006.

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT (SHRI CHANDRA SEKHAR SAHU): Sir, I move for leave to introduce a Bill further to amend the Apprentices Act, 1961.

The question was put and the motion was adopted.

SHRI CHANDRA SEKHAR SAHU: Sir, I introduce the Bill. (Ends)

STATEMENT RE. STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN HUNDRED AND SIXTIETH, HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SECOND, HUNDRED AND SIXTY-THIRD, HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SEVENTH, HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FIRST, HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-THIRD AND HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FIFTH REPORTS OF DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY.

 

֑ ӡ ֣ ִ ӡ ( ־߸ ֤) : , ׾ֳ-Ӳ׬֟ ӲӬ ֤ߵ ãֵ ״ן 160, 162, 163, 167, 171, 173 175 ן־ ӟپ™ ֱ׸ ֵԮֵ֮ ãן ӲӬ ֌־ ֳ-֙ ָ ֟ (ִ֯)

STATEMENT RE. STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN SEVENTH, EIGHTH AND NINTH REPORTS OF THE DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLAIMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE.

 

THE MINISTER OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (DR. ANBUMANI RAMDOSS): Sir, I beg to lay a statement regarding status of implementation of the recommendations contained in the Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Reports of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and Family Welfare. (Ends)

PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS (RESOLUTIONS)

RESOLUTION RE. PROVIDING EMPLOYMENT TO EDUCATED YOUTH AND RELIEF TO UNEMPLOYED YOUTH TILL THEY

ARE EMPLOYED --- CONTD.

 

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Hon. Members, the Mover of the Resolution Shri Datta Meghe, wishes to withdraw the Resolution. The Mover, Shri Datta Meghe, is not present in the House today. If the House agrees, I shall now put the Resolution to vote. The question is,

"Having regard to the fact that the number of unemployed youth

has been increasing year by year and the Government have not been able to generate sufficient employment in the country even for those who possess technical qualifications like engineering, medical, etc., this House urges upon the Government to come up with some schemes for providing employment or in the alternate provide relief to all unemployed youth till they secure employment."

 

The motion was negatived.

(Followed by 3d/SKC)

3D/3.15/SKC

RESOLUTION RE. REMOVAL OF DIFFICULTIES BEING EXPERIENCED BY VARIOUS STATES WHILE DELIMITING CONSTITUENCIES

 

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (PONDICHERRY): Sir, I beg to move the following resolution:-

"Having regard to the fact that --

1.     the Delimitation Act was passed by Parliament and the process of delimitation has already started in various States and they are facing a lot of difficulties in implementing the provisions of the Delimitation Act;

2.     several representations have been received from various States and even from the legislators stating that since population was the criteria adopted for delimiting the constituencies, ignoring other conditions prevailing in various States, the basic structure of the constituencies is being changed;

3.     in North-Eastern States there are various districts covering larger area of lands with less population;

4.     if population criteria is adopted for delimiting the constituencies, the cities get more representation than the rural areas because of the high concentration of the population; and

5.     the elected representatives who have become Associate Members of the Delimitation Commission have not been given the powers of voting at the time of taking decision under the Delimitation Act, which infringes the rights of the Members.

 

This House resolves that --

a.            the Government should look into the practical difficulties being experienced by various States while delimiting the constituencies.

b.           apart from the population criteria, topography of the area, ravines, rivers, districts and communities should also be considered for delimiting the constituencies;

c.            the elected representatives who are Associate Members, should also be provided with voting power so that their views are properly represented in the Delimitation Commission; and

d.           the Delimitation Act should be amended accordingly.

The question was proposed.

(Ends)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Now, Shri Jesudasu Seelam.

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Sir, I wish to speak on the Resolution...(interruptions)...

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Resolution itself contains a lengthy explanation.

SHRI RAVULA CHANDRA SEKAR REDDY: Sir, he must be allowed to explain, otherwise, nobody would support it...(interruptions)...

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: For the benefit of the House, I shall have to explain it, Sir.

Sir, this is a very important Resolution, where I can say that the political parties are together. They are together, irrespective of whether they belong to the Ruling Party or the Opposition Party, whether they belong to Delhi or to Andhra Pradesh, because the issues involved are very serious in nature. The Government of India, from time to time, appoint a Delimitation Commission, for the purpose of giving representation to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and also, to the backward regions and city limits. Moreover, it takes twenty years to delimit constituencies. In 2002, the Delimitation Act was passed by Parliament for delimitation of constituencies and it was adopted by both the Houses of Parliament.

Sir, the point is that while delimiting constituencies, the Government never interferes; it is to be done by the Delimitation Commission with assistance from the Election Commission of India. The process has been notified in the Act and the procedure has been envisaged.

Sir, the reason why I was prompted to bring this Resolution to this august House, is that while implementing the provisions of the Delimitation Commission, the guidelines enunciated, the procedure to be followed, and the rules to be implemented are not being properly followed. The hon. Law Minister is present in this august House. The kind of representations that the Law Ministry has received, and the hon. President of India has received from public representatives, whether it be Members of Parliament or legislators and also from the common public, is a matter of concern for all of us. There is no quarrel that the constituencies have to be delimited on the basis of population in view of population explosion. But, Sir, there is one criterion that needs to be considered by the Government and also the Delimitation Commission. Take the case of North Eastern States. In the North-Eastern States, the State capital, the population is concentrated. If one goes to the other districts, the population is scattered, where in a village, there are only 50 families and in another village, there are 100 families. (Contd. by 3E/HK)

HK/3e/3.20

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (CONTD.): In another village, there are hundred families. The area is so spread that the constituency has become very big. In the case of city, in the North-Eastern States, whether it is Meghalaya, Manipur or Mizoram, the constituency in the town limit is increasing, and the constituency in the rural area is decreasing because the population has been considered as a criteria for the purpose of delimiting the constituency. It is not only with the North-Eastern States, it is also with other States whether it is Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata , Chennai, Bangalore or Hyderabad. Now, there are eight constituencies in the urban limit in Bangalore. It has become twelve constituencies. The limit has been frozen; the total number of constituencies has been frozen. If they are 224, then they are 224 only. But, Sir, more representation has been given to the urban areas as compared to the rural areas. The Government has to find the balance for this. In the urban limit of Delhi, there is one constituency, that is, outer Delhi. Its total population is more than 25 lakhs. But in the other constituencies, it is only ten lakhs. For example, in Hyderabad the population is more in the city limit and the population in the semi-urban area is less. The division is on the basis of population alone. In the urban limits, the constituencies are being increased and in the rural areas the constituencies are being reduced. The Delimitation Commission decides the size on the basis of Section 9 of the Delimitation Act. Section 9 of the Act very clearly mentions, "The Commission shall, in the manner herein provided, distribute the seats in the House of the people allotted to each State on the seats assigned to Legislative Assemblies of each State has readjusted on the basis of 1971 Census to single member territorial constituencies and delimiting them on the basis of Census figures as ascertained in the Census held in the year 2001 having regard to the provisions of the Constitution, the provisions of the Act specified in Section 8 on the following provisions, namely, all constituencies shall, in as far as practicable, be geographically compact areas and delimiting them on the basis of physical features, existing boundaries of administrative units, facilities of communication and public convenience." This is one version. Secondly, every Assembly constituency shall be delimited as to fall wholly within one parliamentary constituency. The constituency in which seats are reserved for Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be distributed in different parts of the State and located, as far as practicable, in those areas where the total of their proportional population is the largest. Sir, this is not being followed. My complaint is that even this provision, which has been enunciated in Section 9, has not been followed. I received several representations as a Member of Parliament. The Delimitation Commission also received several representations from various Legislators, Members of Parliament and also from the general public because they have to consider one Parliament constituency as one unit or district as one unit or the whole State as one unit. Now, Sir, I come to the composition of the Delimitation Commission. There is one Chairman of the Delimitation Commission, one member from the Election Commission and the third is the State Election Commissioner appointed by the State Government. There are three members in the Delimitation Commission. Now what is the procedure that they follow? The compile the data and also maps. Secondly, they prepare the draft working paper on delimiting the constituencies and consult the State Election Commissioners. Thirdly, they consult with the associate members. Associate members are 10 from each State -- five from Parliament and five from the Assembly appointed by the hon. Speaker of the respective Legislative Assembly. In the case of smaller States, it is only five members. The associate members have no voting right. They go for public hearing, where the view of all political parties and public are heard and then they give final notification. (Contd. by 3f/KSK)

KSK/3.25/3f
SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (CONTD): Then, they go to public hearing. There, all the political parties and public views are heard and finally, they give the final notification. So far, the Delimitation Commission has completed the delimitation process in some States, especially the States like Goa, Kerala, Tripura, Mizoram, Rajasthan, West Bengal and Union Territory of Pondicherry. The delimitation process in respect of Chhatisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Sikkim and National Capital Territory of Delhi is going on. In other States also, the process is going on. Sir, here, we find the constituency, take the case of State Capital, where the constituencies have been increased on the basis of population only -- I stress the point 'only population' -- leaving alone the topography and geographical conditions of the district. Thirdly, Sir, points like the river area, whether rivers are there, and moreover, whether the people can reach the other destination, if it is the North-eastern region, have not been considered. It is a very pathetic situation. When the public representatives go before the Delimitation Commission and when they represent the matter, it is heard only for the namesake. I want to tell the hon. Minister when the Associate Members go there, they represent the grievances of the Members collectively, irrespective of the party, it is not being considered. It is totally ignored. Why? It goes to the advantage of the ruling Government because the recommendations and the drawing of the map, identifying of the constituencies, dividing of the constituencies is done by the State Election Commission. When it comes to the Delimitation Commission, they do only cosmetic changes. They don't go into the real nitty-gritty. They don't go into the real issues which are involved. Therefore, Sir, several representations have been received before the Delimitation Commission and also before the Government of India. Sir, what happened is that when the population is to be considered on the basis of SC and ST population, they go according to their own mercy. If there is 25 per cent SC population in a constituency which has to be notified as Scheduled Caste constituency for SC, they don't do it. They show it as 20 per cent only. It is the case with other States also. Not only that, in Pondicherry also, we have several difficulties. I appeared before the Delimitation Commission and we represented the case. What they have done is that in one area, they reduced the constituencies. When they take it as Parliamentary constituency unit, or a district as a unit, that number of the constituencies should not be reduced. Sir, we have got 21 constituencies in Pondicherry, six constituencies in Karaikal, two constituencies in Mahe, one constituency in Yanam. They simply take only population criterion. They have reduced one constituency in Karaikal region, one constituency in Mahe region and they have added two constituencies in Pondicherry against the wishes of the people of the State. Because they have fixed 27,000 population as one unit. That 27,000 population is available in that particular area. As ten per cent plus or minus is relaxable and when they have ten per cent plus or minus, for the purpose of the population alone, when exactly specified population exists, for the purpose of dividing the constituencies as six units, they have ignored the recommendation or suggestion made by the Associate Members and they have said that they would make five constituencies. In other area, they have taken away one constituency. The issue has flared up. Even the common people are sending their representations that one of their constituencies is being taken away. Therefore, Sir, there is a procedural malfunctioning because the procedure, that has been adopted, varies from one State to the other because the Delimitation Commission has to follow the guidelines, the rules and procedures for all the States according to the rules framed and the Act itself. As I said, Sir, section 9 very clearly mentions that the geography of the area has to be considered. When a State is scattered, the geography is very important. That has not been considered. It has been ignored. And, even when one constituency has population of 27,000 as a unit, when that specified population is available, they have cut one constituency in another area. (Continued by 3g)

GSP-MCM/3.30/3G

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (CONTD.): Sir, the public representatives, who represented before the Delimitation Commission, told me that the injury caused to them has to be compensated. But they did not bother, they simply said, this is our final decision. Unfortunately, Sir, the decision taken by the Delimitation Commission cannot be challenged in a court of law. When the hon. President gives his consent, it is final. Sir, there are real issues which have been involved, and, one is about the North-Eastern States which are facing problems because of the urban concentration, which is there. Suppose, in one assembly constituency, they have to cover about one hundred square kilometres in the tribal area, and, if in another constituency, in one town itself, where there are three, four assembly constituencies, what will be the extent of the problems that those tribal people have to face. We will have to see from that angle also. We have to see to it because we cannot equate the North-Eastern States with the other States in the plain areas. Therefore, Sir, this issue has become relevant. It has to be addressed very carefully because the tribal people are very sensitive people.

Moreover, when the representation given to the people in one area is taken away, the kind of revolt that is coming from that area has to be seen. You know pretty well about Bangalore rural, and, then Bangalore urban. Sir, urban constituencies are increasing while the rural constituencies are being reduced. Take the case of Hyderabad, our hon. Member knows, where this is the only issue where the Congress Party and the TDP are together in Andhra Pradesh. (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: There also, you are...(Interruptions)

SHRI RAVULA CHANDRA SEKAR REDDY: Sir, normally, if the Whip of the Ruling Party moves a Resolution, we feel it is an official Resolution. I am here to oppose it.

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Sir, this problem is there in Delhi also. Sir, there are about seventy assembly constituencies in Delhi and the population is about...(Interruptions)

ֵ ֿ Ͼֻ : ָ ׻֋

ֳ֯ן : פ ֻ ֮ ֻ

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Okay, there is no problem. Sir, there is an inherent defect in implementation by the Delimitation Commission. The issues involved are sensitive issues. It is not only the question of drawing the boundaries on the map only. Various other aspects have to be seen. The sentiments of the tribal people have to be seen. The urban areas have to be seen. The geographical conditions of the places have to be seen. The ravine, rivers and also the accessibility of the people have to be seen. Apart from that, the Delimitation Commission has to consider the representation that is there.

Sir, here, I would like to mention a very important point. The associate members should also have the voting right. The reason why I am stressing this issue is that the Chairman of the Delimitation Commission, the members of the Election Commission take decisions by majority, and, the State Election Commissions join them. The representation, which has been made by the associate members, has been thrown into the dustbin. The genuine grievances, genuine issues that are raised by the elected representatives have to be addressed by the Delimitation Commission. Let the hon. Minister inform the House as to how many representations did the Law Ministry receive from various States, especially, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu. Sir, in one State, the associate members resigned enmass. They don't want to participate in the Delimitation Commission because of -- I don't want to use aggressive words -- the attitude of the Delimitation Commission. Sir, the public representatives, whether they are the Members of Parliament or the Members of State Legislatures, represent the will of the people. Yes, they have some grievances because their constituencies are being ignored. I don't want to go into that aspect. I go into the common aspect, the common aspect of proper representation to the people in a proper manner as provided in the Delimitation Act. Therefore, they should also be given the voting right. The complaint that has been received from the public representatives has to be considered. The Delimitation Commission should not ignore it. Sir, in our party, the Congress Party, our hon. Member, Shri Seelam is coordinating with our Member States in the Delimitation Commission for the purpose of redressal of grievances. (Contd. by sk/3h)

SK/3h/3.35

SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY (CONTD.): They are also aware how the representation has been received by the party from various States also. Therefore, it is a very serious matter which has been a burning issue. The Delimitation Commission does not bother about anybody. They have finished it in six States. They will finish everything. In the next Parliamentary election, it has to be implemented. While implementing it, there will be hue and cry from the public, from the Members of Parliament and from the Legislators. At that time, there will be chaos in this country. Therefore, it is high time the hon. Minister should consider amending the Delimitation Act, giving the proper thought and following the proper procedure. All the sections of the society have to be given proper representation. The spirit of the Delimitation Commission has to be fully implemented. It should not be under whims and fancies of certain people, certain groups of people. Therefore, Sir, they should work in an unbiased manner in giving representation, hearing the representations of the various people and seeing that justice should be done irrespective of the political affiliations. This is my submission, Sir. Therefore, I move this Resolution, Sir. I want this House to adopt the Resolution unanimously, so that the hon. Minister may consider it. Thank you, Sir.

The question was proposed.

(Ends)

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Narayanasamy for bringing this important Resolution in the Council of States regarding the delimitation of the Councils. Hon. Members, time limit of speech is, no speech in Resolution, except the permission of the Chair, shall exceed 15 minutes in duration, provided, the Mover of the Resolution, when moving the same, when he is speaking for the first time may speak for 30 minutes. This is the rule. I am reminding you. Now, Mr. Jesudasu Seelam. You have not more than 15 minutes.

SHRI JESUDASU SEELAM (ANDHRA PRADESH): Hon. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I stand to support this Resolution. I agree with the hon. Member, Shri Narayanasamy, who gave a detailed account of difficulties which the various States have been facing. I have the fortune of associating with this work for the last four years. I would like to bring to your kind notice, without repeating the points which have already been brought to the notice of this House by hon. Narayanasamyji, Sir, why this delimitation exercise has been taken up. It is an obligation under the Constitution of India that every ten years, we have to delimit our constituencies, after the Census operations are over. But, for various reasons, somehow, we could not do the last delimitation exercise. The last delimitation exercise was taken up immediately after the 1971 Census. This exercise was completed in 1976 and the elections in 1977 were conducted with the new Delimitation Act. So, for the last nearly 35 years, it has been due. We should have done this delimitation exercise. It has been long due, Sir. So, what is the rationale? The rationale is, some of the examples have been given by Mr. Narayanasamy, there are certain constituencies which have vast population, say, up to 30 lakh people, and there are certain Parliamentary constituencies which have a very limited population. So, there was a need for rationalising this population and making all the parliamentary constituencies more or less equi-populous. That is number one.

Secondly, Sir, there is an obligation that the Constitution of India lays down, that is, the representation of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes should be in proportion to their population. So, there is a need to correct that imbalance which is presently existing to give proportional representation to SCs/STs according to their population. So, that is the second criterion. Based on these two principles, the Delimitation Act was passed by Parliament in 2002. But, because some objections were raised to take the 2001 Census, because the earlier amendment was passed on 1991 Census, again the Delimitation Act was amended and the Delimitation Act 2003 was brought in to take the figures of 2001 Census. So, that being the case, Sir, how to go about? Section 9 of the Act clearly indicates how the Delimitation Commission would be. As rightly pointed out by the Mover of the Resolution, the Chairman would be from outside. One of the Members of the Election Commission will be the Delimitation Commission Member and one Member from the State Election Commission would be ex-officio Member. There are three ex-officio Members, Sir. (Contd. by YSR-3j)

-SK/YSR/3.40/3J

SHRI JESUDASU SEELAM (CONTD.): Then there is problem regarding functioning of the Commission. Sir, nobody is talking about the Act. Nobody is talking about the provisions. On how the Commission functions, how it associates members from each State, and what are the difficulties, the disparities, and the problems of the people, a detailed account has been given by the hon. Member. Basically, I would like to categorise these disparities in four ways. I do not share the hon. Member's views fully, because wherever possible the Delimitation Commission does accommodate the genuine problems. Sir, problems are in both the ways.

Some of our hon. Members insist that they don't want to change their constituencies in any way. All the boundaries should be intact. Sir, sometimes it is also unreasonable. Sir, we should also, while saying that this should be done, look at our own interpretation. Sir, I would submit that there is a lot much one can improve, because there is a way to get things done under the provisions. The ten per cent plus or minus is provided only to see that administrative units are not divided because one wants constituency in a certain way. That leverage, that cushion is given by the Commission itself. I compliment the Commission because it has been working day in and day out. I keep in touch with them on day-to-day basis. There are certain difficulties which the Commission itself cannot do away with, because the Act lays down that the administrative boundary should be kept intact. Administrative boundary varies from State to State. In some States, there is Patwari Circle; in some States, it is a Village; in some States, it is a hamlet; in some States, it is a Panchayat System; in some States, it is a Block System; in some States, it is Tehsil; and in some States, it is Mandal system. In such a situation, they go by the consensus of the associate members. How can we change a particular building block? If the members feel that village should be the building block, then the Delimitation Commission goes by it and the village is considered as the building block or the administrative unit. If it is decided that it should be the Community Development Block, they adopt the Community Development Block model. It can be that some associate members may decide that they want to go by the Patwari Circle, or the Revenue Circle Model. While we need to genuinely sort out the difficulties put forth by various hon. Members, I think we should understand the difficulty of the Delimitation Commission also.

I would like to submit before this august House that almost two-third work of the Delimitation commission, as pointed out by the Mover of the Resolution, has been done. There are certain difficulties which even the Delimitation Commission wants to sort out. Basically, there are four areas. One is the urban-rural dichotomy. Since the 1971 Census, over a period of 30-35 years, the rural population has moved out of rural areas. The Census of 2001 shows that a lot of population growth has taken place in majority of urban cities. When you take population as a criterion, you get more number of seats in urban centres. To that extent, seats of the rural areas are reduced. He has cited the example of Bangalore. Right now, we have 16 seats, not 8 seats, Sir. It is going to become 24 seats. So much increase of seats is there in Bangalore city alone. To that extent, the seats in other parts are reduced. If we conduct delimitation after ten years, there will be further shift. If this process continues over two-three times, there is going to be total unrest amongst the rural areas. So, there is some requirement. How do you do it? You can point out that. What is the solution? Sir, the problem here is that in urban areas, density is more, and distances are small. In the rural areas, population is scattered, and distances are also more. So, we can have a slightly different criterion. It may be 20-30 per cent more population per constituency in an urban area, so that there is no large amount of shift or the pull factor or the push factor towards the urban centre.

(Contd. by VKK/3K)

VKK/3k/3.45

SHRI JESUDASU SEELAM (CONTD.): That is one factor. Even the Delimitation Commission is also looking into it. This urban-rural problem is one area. Secondly, Sir, regarding hilly and plain regions. As you know, hilly terrain is difficult; houses are scattered; vast regions have to be covered if you equate the population that there should be two lakh per constituency which is equivalent to the same number in the rural plain areas. Here also, we need to say that it should be 20 to 30 per cent less per assembly constituency in hilly regions compared to plain regions so that we can take care of this. It is difficult to move in hilly regions if you link, put up and add together vast area and put it as one constituency. So, in hilly and plain regions, this is the second difficulty this part has been facing.

The third is about the North-East. Sir, I would like to submit to the hon. Members who are well aware that in North-East, say Manipur and Nagaland which are border States sharing international border with other countries, we have this problem, in the last 30 years, there is division of States, creation of more districts, basing on the ethnicity, basing on the particular tribe. For instance, in Arunachal Pradesh, there are 16 districts. Each district is inhabited by a particular tribe. You see, what happens if you truncate the district or if you change the number of seats in a district, the tribe gets disturbed. They are saying that their identity is lost; you do delimitation, but don't disturb, what is called, the district identity where each district is made depending on the population of the tribals, like 16 major tribes and 16 districts. So, they suggested to the Commission that don't disturb the existing number of seats per district because, by doing so -- by extending seats from one to the other reducing or increasing -- our cultural identity is disturbed and this is very, very sensitive. After all, delimitation is done for what? The delimitation is done for the people's convenience and for the public good. That is why, I think, we need to take the sensitivities into consideration and devise a method where the people's sensitivities and the people's feelings are not hurt, thereby create more problems, adding to the problems they already have.

Sir, the fourth and the last area, which we have been trying to sort out and where we have been facing lot of problem, is the tribal and non-tribal areas. Sir, while doing the delimitation exercise, we have a responsibility to keep the tribal character of a particular constituency. The Constitution also recognises special tribal areas and the Government of India spends lot of money on tribal sub-areas because tribes are characterised by specific area. So, I think, we need to take into consideration these sensitivities, the character of the tribal constituencies, the special difficulties of hilly regions and the feelings of the rural population. But, Sir, what is the solution? This issue has been deliberated in consultation with the hon. Law Minister and with a large number of people's representatives who come to our office and express this problem and who have given in writing to the Prime Minister, to the Delimitation Commission and to the associate members, giving a copy to us. What we told them was that we requested the Government to come up with some modifications where the district seats could be frozen as we have frozen the State seats. It is not the reorganisation of the constituencies. The present exercise of the Delimitation Commission is that it is not the total reorganisation, but it is only to cut and paste and make the composition of the constituency equi-populous. It is only rearrangement and not reorganisation, not a fresh exercise, because by an amendment, this House has frozen the total number of constituencies till 2026 within the existing number. Now, we cannot increase the number, either Lok Sabha or Assembly seats. Within the total number, we have to do this rearrangement of the constituencies to achieve the twin objectives of equi-populous constituencies on the one side and giving representation to the SC/ST on the other -- proportionate to their population, basing on 2001 Census. (Contd. by RSS/3L)

RSS/3L/3.50

SHRI JESUDASU SEELAM (CONTD.): So, the sum and substance of my submission to this august House, and through the House to the hon. Minister, is that we have to bring a small amendment, wherein, the district seats are to be frozen, and within the seats, we have to make each seat more or less equi-populace. Why am I saying so? Sir, this has a small limitation, and this may result in small disparity. What is the disparity? The disparity would be that it will not be equi-populace throughout the State. It will be equi-populace within the State. There may be variation of some seats in the urban and rural areas within the State, but, that variation, I am sure, you will appreciate was there when the last delimitation exercise was done. The last delimitation exercise done in 1976, also adopted the same procedure, same guidelines. But, I would like to submit that by freezing of the seats at the district level, we need not create this much heartburn, we need not disturb the sentiments of the tribal people, we need not disturb the geographical concentration of district-wise tribal settlements in the North-East States, and we need not worry too much that by doing so, the rural population will be at a disadvantage because, there may be a marginal increase in the urban centres, but not to the extent which is being contemplated at present. So, this is the small amendment. But there are difficulties in passing this amendment. We have to amend the Constitution itself because, article 82 of the Constitution of India provides that throughout the State, the quantum of population should be more or less the same. That is the prescription. That needs to be slightly modified. We need to go in for a constitutional amendment. It is not simply sufficient to amend the Delimitation Act. So, that is the limitation. If the hon. House feels that we have to do the freezing of districts only after amending article 82, we have to replace the word 'district' in place of 'State'. That is the only amendment which is required to article 82 of the Constitution of India, and subsequently, section 9 of the Delimitation Act, 2003 also needs to be amended.

The third point is that the hon. Member has mentioned about the role of the associated members. Sir, most of the associated members for the last two years have been looking at the submissions they are making before the Commission. I may say that it was observed that most of the associated members are concentrating on their own constituencies rather than taking the States interest as a whole. That was one of the allegations made by the non-associated members who also came and placed their views. So, there was a consensus that the national parties should have a representation, and at each stage, they should be heard by the Delimitation Commission to take care of the feelings of the non-associated members, who did not have an opportunity to place their difficulties before the Commission. I agree with the hon. Member who moved the Resolution, Shri V. Narayanasamy, that the associated members should be given more importance. It is not only the question of recording their views as a dissent note, but it should also be gone into in letter and spirit because they do represent the people, and they could have received a large number of representations before the Commission.

Finally, in States like Chhattisgarh, Uttaranchal and Jharkhand, the three newly formed States, what happened before the States were bifurcated. The seats of the two States put together, were allotted to those three States. Now, they have become 6 States. What happened in Chhattisgarh? The Scheduled Tribes seats are getting less because of demographic reasons, and not because the Delimitation Commission has done something wrong. The Scheduled Tribes seats are calculated by a specific formula. They divide the total population of the State by the Scheduled Tribes population into total number of seats and something to arrive at the number of the Scheduled Tribes. So, whereas the Scheduled Tribes seats are increasing in Madhya Pradesh, the Scheduled Tribes seats are decreasing in Chhattisgarh. This needs to be corrected. (Contd. by 3m)

MKS/AKG/3.55/3M

SHRI JESUDASU SEELAM (CONTD.): This disparity needs to be addressed. Had they been taken together, there would not have been an adverse effect. Because they are bifurcated, the Scheduled Tribe seats are getting reduced in Chhattisgarh. Similarly, in Bihar and Jharkhand, since taken together, there was no problem. When the seats were bifurcated, some of the areas were included. The calculation of population has been done. So, I think, the Delimitation Commission is also expecting a direction from the Government that there can be an increase in the SC/ST seats because of the delimitation exercise, but the existing seats should not be reduced because it will send a negative message to the tribal areas especially. So, these are my submissions.

Sir, I would like to sum up by saying that we need to approach the Delimitation Commission with an amendment to article 82 of the Constitution saying that the population for each constituency should be, more or less, the same within the district, not necessarily within the State. Secondly, there should be a guideline that there can be an increase in the SC/ST seats because of the delimitation exercise, but the existing seats should not be reduced because of this problem. Thirdly, having regard to the special problems that the tribal, the hilly region, the urban and the rural people face, we need to freeze the constituencies at the district level, and this exercise needs to be expedited because we are already late by 30 years. I think, the seats reserved for SCs/STs are to be increased. They have been denied, for the last three decades, their due shares. With regard to the guideline, we can increase, plus or minus the cushion to 20 per cent so as to accommodate some of the difficulties. And fourthly, under any circumstances, whatever the administrative unit may choose, it should not be bifurcated, it should not be divided and it should not be truncated. Taking an overall view, I think, the district freeze would be an ideal one.

With these observations, I once again congratulate the hon. Mover of the Resolution, for bringing before the House such an important Resolution, and I support this Resolution. (Ends)

ֵָ߮ ִ (֬ Ϥ) : ֳ֯ן , ִֵָ ָ ֕ ß ֵ , ֳ ִ֣Ԯ כ׻״֮֙ ߿֮, ֻ ֲ֤ ָ֬ ָ Ùߓߕ Ԛ , ׮׿֟ imbalance ֜օ ו֮֟ ևֻ ׸֕ , ָ ֮ , ֮ ֛ ִ ִ , ֮ ϓָ ך ֵ ׻֋ ׮׿֟ ֟ ֮ ֮ ֛, כ׻״֮֙ ߿֮ ֮ ֮ ֛ כÙ ãן , ִ ײ֛ ֋߅ ևֻ ߴ , ꅠ ׻֋ ֬ Ϥ ָ ׮־

 

(ֳ֬ (. .. ׸֮) ߚ߮ )

֬ Ϥ ֛ؔ וֻ , ֳ ֳ ߙ ևֻ ָ ߙ ֻ ֻ ֮֕֬ וֻ, 4 ߙ , 7 ߙ ֻ ֲ֤ ֲ ߙ ֜ ִ ߙ ߅ ׮׿֟ ָ ӟ֮֕ ֵ օ ָ כ׻״֮֙ ߿֮ پָ֓ ֪ׯ כ׻״֮֙ ߿֮ ןև ׬ ִ ׻ֵ , ִ ךև ֺ , ָ ָ ׾ָ֓ , ׮׿֟ ֳ ״ֻօ ִֵָ ָ ֕ וֻ , ֛ , ֮ܵ פ ׮־ԓ֮ ׸ߴ֮ ֮ܵ ֤֮ޛ ֵ֮ ֟ , ִ ֮ ֮ܵ ׬ ֮֟ ָ ׬ ן׮׬֟ ״ֻօ ׮׿֟ ֟

ֳ֬ , ִֵָ ־ פ , ־ '' ֵ ׮־ԓ֮ ׸ߴ֮ ֮ܵ ֤֮ޛ ן׸ ִֵ ָ ׾ָ֓ ֮ (3/֋֋ ָ ֿ:)

PREVIOUS
MAIN
NEXT