State Assembly has debated an unprecedented issue that a no-confidence motion against sitting government can be moved on charges of irregularities and corruption committed in the past or during previous Assembly.
After question hour when the leader of Opposition Ajay Singh moved the non-confidence motion against the sitting Shivraj Singh Chouhan’s government, Parliament affairs minister Narottam Mishra raised point of order and contested the motion by referring section 85 (2) (B) of the Indian constitution and define the word ‘dissolve the house’ , “The main Opposition has mentioned in its no-confidence motion that has been brought against Shivraj Singh Chouhan and the present council of ministers and they want to discuss issues and allegations of the previous assembly. No matter of the previous assembly can be debated or taken into record in the present assembly. He further argued, “ the section does not allow opposition to debate on allegations against the members of the previous assembly which has already been dissolved.”
To which a senior Congress member Choudhury Rakesh Singh replied by referring business rules of the state Assembly pertaining to non-confidence motion, “On 22 July 2002 the then leader of opposition Dr Gauri Shankar Shejwar moved a non-confidence motion against then chief minister Digvijay Singh in which Dr Shejwar debated and raised issues of 1998 of the Digvijay Singh government. He even raised and debated some issues pertaining to the formation of the state. Why this assembly cant debate irregularities committed by present government in the past?”
Choudhury Rakesh Singh raised a point that the Dumper-Scam (in which allegations have been made against the chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan and his family members), “the Dumper case is pending in high court, why it can be debated”?. The speaker Ishwar Das Rohani objected and ruled that sub judice matters can’t be debated in assembly.
Industry minister Kailash Vijayvergiya also referred to few cases and a supreme court ruling that reinstated a Punjab Government minister who was sacked in the previous assembly. He read out the gist of the judgment and said, “The gist of the Supreme Court ruling clearly defines that the present Assembly can’t debate the issues of the previous assembly.”
Other congress members namely Arif Aqeel, Dr Govind Singh, NP Prajapati and others challenged the industry minister Kailash Vijayvergiya, parliament minister Narottam Mishra, Animal Husbandry minister Ajay Vishnoi and argued that they (the sitting ministers) can’t defend themselves by referring rule books.
The speaker however capped the non-confidence motion and limited its debate to present issues. The assembly is witnessing the no-confidence motion after a gap of nine years.
There are 37 allegations of corruption made in the no-confidence motion against the chief minister and various other ministers, their family members and relatives. One allegation is against an ex-chief secretary.
