NEW DELHI: The Rajya Sabha on Monday approved the extension of President's rule in Bihar for another six months with Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil backing the Governor's recommendation for dissolution of the State Assembly to avoid "Constitutional chaos." The Opposition staged a walkout after claiming that Mr. Patil's reply failed to address their concerns.

Mr. Patil began his reply by asking the members to "bear in mind the facts pertinent to the issue" — the Governor was impartial as he rejected the claims made by the party that was in power earlier; the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) did not stake claim until the end; and the Centre and the Governor waited for months for someone to stake a credible claim, and dissolved the House when it became apparent that some parties were indulging in horse-trading.

"What was our mistake?"

"Where did we go wrong? What was our mistake?" he asked, adding that all that the Government had done was to ask the politicians to seek another mandate from the people. "Probably we have been too careful," he wondered. The Governor had sent a report after two months of the poll results recommending dissolution of the Assembly. "But we waited for some more time for someone to stake a claim."

"The Centre knew attempts were being made to win away MLAs of some parties. The question is would you accept a government formed on the basis of horse-trading? Did we commit a mistake? We did not dissolve the House [on the basis of the first report by the Governor] and time was given which was utilised for horse trading and that government would have not sustained." Responding to Fali Nariman's (Nominated) observation that the Centre could have waited for the President to return from his overseas tour, Mr. Patil said the decision to suspend the Bihar Assembly was passed unanimously by Parliament.

To P.C. Alexander's charge that the Union Cabinet took the decision at midnight and the President was asked to recommend it while he was in Moscow, Mr. Patil said: "We were trying to be correct. When no one could form the Government, we could not help it.''

Mr. Patil contended that the Centre would have allowed two or more parties to form the Government if the leaders of those parties had arrived at an agreement. But some MLAs of a party were discussing government formation and they did not constitute two-thirds of that party to effect a split according to Constitutional norms. "If they were not defecting, it was possible to talk in Patna. Why go to the capital of an adjoining state?" he asked. The Home Minister contended that the proof of horse-trading was on television and everyone saw it.

However, Sushma Swaraj (Bharatiya Janata Party) said the Minister had not replied to many of the charges including the conflict between the Governor and the top echelons of the bureaucracy.

The NDA walked out in protest and the resolution was passed by a voice vote.

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