 |
| Chief minister Babulal Marandi outside Raj Bhavan. Picture by Hardeep Singh |
Ranchi, March 15: The Babulal Marandi government seems to have pushed Jharkhand into a Constitutional crisis by allegedly encroaching upon the rights of the Assembly and ignoring the directives of Raj Bhavan.
Political experts have accused the Cabinet of usurping the Speaker’s right to reconvene the House on his own after adjourning it sine die. They feel the Marandi Cabinet has been exposed of its minority status by exceeding its purview.
“The Marandi Cabinet decided to unconstitutionally convene the adjourned House on March 27 when Speaker Inder Singh Namdhari had already convened it on March 17,” experts said.
Speakers of several states, cutting across party lines, came out in Namdhari’s support. Uttar Pradesh Speaker Kesri Nath Tripathi, a BJP member, said Namdhari could legally summon the House as it had not been prorogued. Tripathi believed that the Speaker could have summoned the House even without the Governor’s direction. He said the government’s direction, “was not needed at all”.
Tripathi told The Telegraph from Allahabad: “Till the House is prorogued by the Governor, the Speaker has the right to declare sine die suspension or to summon the House whenever he deems fit. Once the session has been notified, it becomes the Speaker’s prerogative to run the House. Sine die means the next date has not been fixed, it does not mean that the House has been prorogued. The Speaker can call the House even on a holiday.”
Secretaries of Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Uttaranchal Assemblies echoed Kesri’s views. “The Speaker does everything on the recommendation of the business advisory committee, but even if he summons the House without consulting it, the step will be constitutional,” the Rajasthan secretary said. The Uttaranchal secretary said: “The floor test is against the Cabinet. How can the Cabinet decide the date? The Speaker is right.”
Maharashtra Speaker Arun Gowardhan Gujrati, too, agreed with Namdhari’s decision. He said in Maharasthra, the Speaker is authorised to suspend the House for a maximum of seven days according to the Maharasthra Vidhan Mandal Rules. “But rules differ from state to state. Normally, whoever suspends the House has the right to revoke it too,” he said.
“The Cabinet had no right to change the date decided by the Speaker and it assumes serious consequences, especially when he (Speaker) had summoned the House on the direction of the Governor. The Cabinet move is aimed at buying time to indulge in horse-trading,” experts alleged.
But an expert gave a contrary view. He said the Jharkhand Assembly rules of executive business mentioned that the proposal to summon the Assembly session should have come from the leader of the House. “There was already a set programme of the House and it was to re-open on March 21, if the House is to be convened before that day, the proposal should come from the leader of the House who is the chief minister,” he added.