UNITED NATIONS, N. Y., Dec. 8—Indian delegates today derided the General Assembly's call for a cease‐fire in the war with Pakistan and indicated India would not obey it. The Pakistani delegation expressed strong reservations about its terms.

One Indian delegate, N. P. Jain, called it “much too vague” and another, Narendra Singh, asked whether India would stop fighting and pull her troops back, said:

“Certainly not; we are not foolish.”

The chief Indian delegate, Samar Sen, said, “The Assembly, as usual, is extremely noble in adhering to principles, but not very realistic.”

A Pakistani delegate said, “It's up to India to stop; they are aggressors.” He reaffirmed the detailed reservations given by Pakistan after the resolution was adopted late last night, by a vote of 104 to 11.

In a speech to the Assembly, Agha Shahi of Pakistan, referring to the resolution's call for “efforts to bring about conditions necessary for the voluntary return of the East Pakistan refugees to their homes,” said his Government refused to negotiate with Bengali rebels.

The mood was uneasy here as the fighting on the subcontinent continued, despite the overwhelming support for the resolution, which is not binding on the combatants.

Some Western diplomats warned privately that prestige of the United Nations and hence its effectiveness stood to suffer if its resolution went ignored. Secretary General Thant made it known that he had asked both sides to agree to the establishment of neutral zones in the Dacca area where foreigners could take refuge. The chief American delegate, George Bush, called a news conference in which he defended Washington's support for the resolution.

No person in authority here seems to have decided what should be done next if the fighting continues. Diplomats from several Western countries talked, more or less vaguely, of returning the issue to the Security Council, whose resolutions can be enforced. The Council was paralyzed when the Soviet Union vetoed two resolutions on the subject over the weekend and the debate was shifted to the Assembly.

Ambassador Bush, his face lined with fatigue, underscored the uncertainties when he said that he had no instructions from Washington on the possibility of returning to the Council but that he expected to consult with other ambassadors on the matter.

He said “large numbers of troops, particularly Indian troops,” had crossed borders, and he observed, a trifle wearily, “they all ought to go back where they came from and see their families.”

Indians Are Cheerful

By contrast, the mood was cheerful among Indian delegates, some of whom wore small flags in their lapels. Other delegates called them “war flags,” but Mr. Jain said they were in observance of the Indian equivalent of Memorial Day.

Interviewed in the delegates' lounge, he made this statement about the resolution: “We are prepared to cooperate with the United Nations, with the international community, provided that the problem is considered in its correct perspective, our point of view is fully taken into account, and the realities are faced—as that alone would pave the way /for a lasting peace in the subcontinent.”

But he declared that India now considered that there were three parties to the combat: India, Pakistan and Bangla Desh, meaning Bengal Nation, which is what the Indian authorities and the Bengali secessionists call East Pakistan. India has recognized Bangla Desh as a sovereign government.

This Indian view contrasted with the Pakistani position affirmed before the assembly by Ambassador Shahi, that “a demand on the Government of Pakistan to negotiate with secessionist elements will be rejected by my Government.”

It has long seemed clear to observers critical of Pakistan that some sort of accord with East Pakistani dissident leaders would be a minimum condition for the return of the East Pakistani refugees — estimated at 10 million—who have streamed across the border into India this year.

Mr. Shahi, speaking solemnly and with strong emphasis, expressed particular reservations about two clauses in the resolution. They said that the Assembly was “recognizing the need to deal appropriately at a subsequent stage with the issues which have given rise to the hostilities,” and was “convinced that an early political solution would be necessary for the restoration of conditions of normalcy in the area of conflict and for the return of the refugees to their homes.”

Ambassador Shahi said that any efforts made by the Assembly to do so must be within the principle of the territorial integrity of Pakistan, and no attempt should be made to disrupt the “national unity of Pakistan either partially or totally.”

Mr. Shahi said that the resolution was “full of defects” but that he had voted in favor of it last night—though without instructions from his Government—“out of deference to the overwhelming will of the membership of this Assembly.” He praised the Assembly for having taken action.

India Opposed It

India was among the 11 nations, including the Soviet Union, that voted against the resolution. Western diplomats here underscored Moscow's isolation, noting that although most Eastern European Communist states had joined with the Soviet Union on the issue, Romania and Egypt had not.

The Soviet Union sided with. India, which has received Soviet arms and which shares a common foe, China. By the same token, China sided with Pakistan after a series of declarations from Peking affirming support for, the Pakistani Government.

China voted in favor of the resolution, although her regular representative here, Huang Hua, said in a speech afterward that its wording was “highly unsatisfactory.”