Wednesday,
November 21, 2001,
Chandigarh, India
|
Walkout over George’s return New Delhi, November 20 The adjournment motion on Ayodhya, moved by non-Congress parties to censure the government on the entry of VHP activists into the heavily guarded temple at Ayodhya in violation of a Supreme Court order was rejected by the Speaker, Mr G.M.C. Balayogi. “Adjournment motion is an extraordinary device which, if admitted, leads to setting aside the normal business for discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance,” Mr Balayogi said, ruling that “though the subject is important enough to merit discussion in the House, I do not consider it appropriate to adjourn the entire business for this purpose.” He told the members that a meeting of the Business Advisory Committee (BAC) and leaders of parties and groups in the Lok Sabha was scheduled in the afternoon. The notice for adjournment motion was given by Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav (Samajwadi Party), Mr Somnath Chatterjee (CPM), Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh (RJD), Mr P.R. Dasmunsi (Congress) and Mr G.M. Banatwala (Muslim League) and some others. The Opposition also tried to rake up the controversial re-induction of Mr George Fernandes into the Cabinet even before the enquiry commission on Tehelka had given its report. The government was not game for the discussion as it maintained that the appointment of a Cabinet minister could not be discussed under any rule in the House as it was the prerogative of the Prime Minister. With the government in no mood to oblige the Opposition on their demand for a personal clarification from Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee the members staged a walkout. Angry members from the Congress, Left parties, Samajwadi Party and RJD alleged that by giving a clean chit to Mr Fernandes the Prime Minister had sought to influence the outcome of the Venkataswami Commission, which was inquiring into the Tehelka expose. “The Prime Minister owes an explanation to members as he is accountable to Parliament,” Congress chief whip Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi demanded while raising the issue during zero hour. Countering the Opposition charge, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pramod Mahajan, shortly after the walkout, rejected the demand for an explanation by the Prime Minister and removal of Mr Fernandes. Mr Fernandes is “totally innocent”, Mr Mahajan said, contending that the commission had not till now levelled any charge directly or indirectly against him. |
||||||
|
Stop temple construction, says Opposition New Delhi, November 20 Congress member Suresh Pachouri raised the issue during the zero hour. Mr Pachouri wanted to know why the Uttar Pradesh Government had not taken any action on the Supreme Court notice for the revival of prosecution of three Union Ministers — Mr
L.K. Advani, Mr Murli Manohar Joshi and Ms Uma Bharati — in the Ayodhya demolition case. The repeated reference to the three Union Ministers and the VHP created a mild uproar in the House. The issue was set to rest when Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs O. Rajagopal said the government was ready for a discussion on Ayodhya. |
| | Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 121 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |