With reference to the amendment that has been tabled by Mr. Chaliha, we have the fullest sympathy. The Advisory Sub-committee for the tribal areas had investigated into this affair. It is quite true that for administrative reasons only about 35 years or 40 years ago – 35 years I think is more correct – this area of Dimapur was brought under Naga Hill administration. The mouzas of Sarapathan and Borpathan in Golaghat sub-division brought under partially excluded area with the result that this portion-the mouza of Dimapur – was cut off altogether from the normal administration. They had, therefore, to tag it on with the administration of the Naga Hills. We had the opportunity of examining the inhabitants of this area and we saw that they were determinedly opposed to their inclusion in the Naga autonomous District. We fully sympathize with their aspirations, taking into consideration that this place at one time was the capital of a big kingdom of the Kacharis. But the remedy has already been provided in the Constitution, and I think, it is not possible for us to take the case of particular mouzas piece-meal. The Constitution can provide only general articles or provisions for the purpose of meeting such cases. It will be seen that it is possible under paragraph 1, sub-clause (3) to diminish any area in an autonomous district. I do not know whether the word “diminish” would cover such cases as we now have, and I should have no objection to substituting it by the word “exclude” (that might also better serve the purpose) and in the third reading, this correction, if necessary, may be made.
