Session eve, Oppn wants to discuss Art 356; Speaker says it’s sub judice

While the Congress and other Opposition parties have given notices for discussions on this issue in both Houses, the government, which has not taken a clear line on the matter yet, may block them citing court proceedings.

Written by Pradeep Kaushal | New Delhi | Updated: April 25, 2016 4:43 am
parliament-l Kharge requested the Speaker to accept his party’s notice for the admission of an adjournment motion on Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh on Monday.

The Centre and Opposition looked headed for a confrontation over the destabilisation of Congress governments by the BJP in Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh from day one of the Parliament session beginning on Monday.

While the Congress and other Opposition parties have given notices for discussions on this issue in both Houses, the government, which has not taken a clear line on the matter yet, may block them citing court proceedings.

“The issue of President’s Rule in Uttarakhand is sub judice. I don’t think it can be discussed until April 27,” Lok Sabha Speaker Sumitra Mahajan said while talking to reporters after presiding over an all-party meeting on the eve of the second half of the Budget session.

Sources said that she did not take this line at the meeting, when the issue came up.

Those present at the meeting included Mallikarjun Kharge (Congress), P Venugopal (AIADMK), Bhartruhari Mahtab (BJD), A P Jithender Reddy (TRS), Tariq Anwar (NCP) and Ram Chandra Paswan (LJP). The government was represented by Minister of State Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi.

The Supreme Court has stayed until April 27, the next date of hearing of the Centre’s appeal against the order of the Uttarakhand High Court that set aside the imposition of President’s Rule in the state.

Kharge requested the Speaker to accept his party’s notice for the admission of an adjournment motion on Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh on Monday. He was supported by Jai Prakash Narain of the RJD. Mahtab said he too had given a notice for a short duration discussion on the arbitrary use of Article 356 of the Constitution for the removal of state governments.

Sources said Kharge told the meeting that he wanted to raise the Pathankot issue again — which had been debated during the last session — under Rule 195, which warrants a response from the government, but not a general discussion. Kharge also flagged the India-US Logistics Agreement for a debate.

Mahtab favoured a discussion on the Ishrat Jahan case affidavit controversy. Asaduddin Owaisi said if this matter was to be taken up, the functioning of the NIA too should be allowed to be discussed.

There was broad consensus on having a debate on the current drought and drinking water scarcity, which has hit 300 districts in the country.

Venugopal appealed to the government not to bring important Bills in view of the absence of members from the states, which were going through Assembly polls.

WATCH INDIAN EXPRESS VIDEOS HERE

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. Braja Behera
    Apr 25, 2016 at 3:27 am
    IF IT IS FOR THE GREATER INTEREST OF THE NATION THERE IS NO HARM AND DISCUSSING IN THE PARLIAMENT,SINCE PARLIAMENT IS SUPREME AS OURS IS PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
    (0)(0)
    Reply
    1. R
      Rishi Raj
      Apr 25, 2016 at 4:38 am
      Parliament is not subordinate to the Supreme Court. As such, it can discuss the use or abuse of the article 356 whenever it desires. The sad fact is that our parliamentarians avoid discussions in general and taking a position in particular. This tendency has provided the judiciar with an opportunity to be over active and ume many fuctions of the legislature which is not good for parliamentary democracy.
      (0)(0)
      Reply
      1. A
        Augustus
        Apr 25, 2016 at 3:55 am
        Article 356 is the most misused next to reservations, right from the times of Congress to BJP it is used for political gains, it should be limited to use only in cases of collapse of law and order leading to large scale violence as in the case of Gujarat riots and Babri Masjid demolition case, horse trading is not an issue as long as weakness of majority rule is the basis of Indian democracy
        (0)(0)
        Reply