Himachal Pradesh Assembly: Winter session turns stormy following Revenue Minister Negi’s remarks

He claimed that Thakur had got large tents erected and spent crores on Mission Repeat. Also, the transport corporation was not paid Rs 18 crore. Alleging that the Opposition is not a well-wisher of Himachal Pradesh, Negi said had the BJP supported the Congress government, the state would have received financial assistance from the Centre for disaster relief.

The remark immediately provoked strong objections from the BJP MLAs.

Leader of Opposition Jai Ram Thakur was not present in the House when the statement was made. Upon entering, he sought permission from the Speaker to respond, but Pathania asked him to first allow the minister to complete his address. This prompted BJP legislators to rise from their seats, shout anti-government slogans, and demand that the Revenue Minister withdraw his remarks. The situation escalated when opposition members stormed into the well of the House. Members of the treasury benches retaliated with counter-sloganeering, plunging the session into complete disorder. As neither side agreed to return to their seats, the Speaker adjourned the proceedings until 2 pm.

Before adjourning the House, Pathania issued a significant ruling that adjournment motions under Rule 67 must be completed within a single day and shall henceforth be taken up only after the Question Hour.

The ruling came amid strong objections from the Opposition, which insisted that the House conduct the Question Hour before resuming Thursday’s debate. Despite their protests, the Speaker allowed the discussion on the motion to continue.

Thakur accused the government of exerting undue influence on the Speaker’s chair and argued that the Question Hour, being crucial legislative business, could not be suspended. “If the government insists on continuing the debate, we will consider it as pressure on the Speaker. The Opposition will not function under government pressure,” he said.

Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu countered the allegations, accusing the Opposition of inconsistency and habitual obstructionism. Sukhu noted that the Opposition had brought more adjournment motions under Rule 67 in the last three years than had been moved in the preceding 74 years. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Harshwardhan Chauhan also questioned the Opposition’s shifting stance, saying the motion they had aggressively sought a day earlier had suddenly become unimportant to them.

BJP legislators Randhir Sharma, Surender Shourie, and Jeet Ram Katwal moved an adjournment motion under Rule 67 to discuss the delay in Panchayat elections. The motion was admitted and scheduled for debate, leading to the exchanges that spilled over into Thursday.

Curated For You

‘Politics trumps economics:’ Jaishankar flags global risks in veiled reference to US

Israel PM Netanyahu seeks presidential pardon in years long corruption trial

Rajasthan minister asks schools to celebrate Babri Masjid demolition day as ‘Shaurya Diwas’, later withdraws order citing exams