The Hindu : A violation of the Constitution, says Opposition

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Feb 04, 2004

National

National

A violation of the Constitution, says Opposition

By Our Special Correspondent

NEW DELHI, FEB. 3. The presentation of the interim budget in the Lok Sabha was held up for over an hour today with the Opposition challenging the constitutional validity of the decision to convene a session of the House without the customary address by the President to Parliament.

The Union Finance Minister, Jaswant Singh, eventually presented it after the Speaker, Manohar Joshi, rejected the Opposition contention.

The Opposition was on its feet as soon as the House assembled, with Somnath Chatterjee of the CPI (M), and the Congress' Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi and Shivraj Patil accusing the Government of violating the Constitution and parliamentary procedures.

It argued that the first session of the new year had to be addressed by the President and since that had not happened, the validity of the session could be challenged in court.

Mr. Chatterjee quoted from the Constitution the rules of procedure and Kaul & Shakhder to say that the sitting of the House was in contravention of the Constitution. "The point of fact is that this is the first session of the new year because the winter session of Parliament was adjourned sine die on December 23."

The Government could convene a session any time till it was not prorogued, except in the case of the first session of the new year, he said.

The former Prime Minister, Chandra Shekhar, and Mr. Dasmunshi supported Mr. Chatterjee and Mr. Patil.

Mr. Chandra Shekhar said that the only point that had to be decided was whether this was the first session of the new year or not. "Parliament cannot be run on falsehood and by misleading the House," he said.

Mr. Dasmunshi said that there was no provision in the Constitution for an interim budget.

The Parliamentary Affairs Minister, Sushma Swaraj, and the Law Minister, Arun Jaitley, maintained that the Government was within its rights to convene a session without the customary presidential address on the ground that the House had not been prorogued.

"This is the second part of the winter session," said Ms. Swaraj. Mr. Jaitley pointed out that in 1963 the House was reconvened in January after being adjourned in December and he urged the Speaker to give his ruling on whether the House had been prorogued or not in December last year.

In his ruling later, Mr. Joshi said that there were several instances in the past when the House had been reconvened. "This session is the second part of the winter session," he said.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National