Mr. President, I strongly oppose the motion that has been placed before this House. I find it is dangerous, mischievous and sectarian, it is strange logic and lacking in simple arithmetic. The argument has been advanced that, according to the best estimates available, there should be added two additional General Members and two additional Sikh Members, and, in a clause of the motion, we are told that the present representation is 6 General, 4 Muslim and 2 Sikh members. I would like to ask my Honourable friend, why he, has not suggested that the Muslim representation should be reduced. That is my first point. If Muslims have left the East Punjab and gone elsewhere, then according to his logic–the logic that he has advanced on behalf of the Sikhs and the General population, surely the same argument should apply on this side. I, say, it is dangerous, Sir. My friend, Mr. Das, has already pointed out that this should be considered on an all-India basis and we should not be working upon flimsy estimates. There should be a census throughout the country. Take my own Province, Bihar. How do we know that we do not need further representation? How many people have come to Bihar from East Bengal or West Punjab or from anywhere else? I do not think we can work on the so-called estimates. They are only estimates. The figures that this Assembly can accept are only the census figures and unless an all-India census is taken and unless we know the actual number of Muslims and the variation there has been in their number from Province to Province or the variation of other people, the general population–I do not think it would be wise for this House to accept his motion. I consider it to be a mischievous and sectarian motion.
