New Delhi, Dec 4 (PTI) Rajya Sabha chairman C P Radhakrishnan on Thursday tried to set the record straight on the scope of Rule 267 in the Rajya Sabha, saying discussion under this provision can only take place on any of the items already listed on the day’s agenda and not on any unrelated subjects.
Session after session, Opposition party MPs have been giving notices under Rule 267, seeking to set aside the agenda of the day to take up discussion on the subject they considered more important. But none of their notices have been accepted in over two decades.
The number of notices has risen in the last few years as the opposition MPs felt the BJP-led government would not allow discussions, even of short duration, on the subjects they want to raise.
In the current Winter Session of Parliament, notices under Rule 267 were given, but Radhakrishnan rejected them all, saying they did not conform to the Rule.
On Wednesday, he rejected two such notices and stated that the provision is being misused through routine notices seeking to suspend the day’s listed business.
The Chairman noted that such notices are now being submitted “almost daily,” despite the Rule not being intended to allow discussions on issues raised at the discretion of individual members.
He stressed that Rule 267 in the Rajya Sabha cannot be equated with an adjournment motion in the Lok Sabha, which is permitted under Article 75(3) of the Constitution. “There is no constitutional or procedural provision authorising Rajya Sabha members to give any adjournment notice under Rule 267,” he said.
Under the rule, only matters already listed for the day’s business can be considered for suspension, and any notice must specify the exact rule to be suspended along with a properly drafted motion. Notices seeking discussion on subjects outside the listed business are “invalid,” he said.
Under Rule 267, any listed business “may be suspended only for (taking up) a matter related to the business already listed for that day,” he said.
Tracing its history, the Chairman recalled that Rule 267 was amended in 2000 on the recommendation of a committee headed by then Chairman Krishan Kant and comprising senior leaders, including Manmohan Singh, Pranab Mukherjee, and Fali Nariman.
The committee had flagged misuse of the Rule to raise unlisted issues and recommended limiting it to listed business only. The House adopted these changes on May 15, 2000, he said.
Between 1988 and 2000, Rule 267 was used only three times, and only twice in full conformity with its provisions. Since the 2000 amendment, no discussion has taken place under the Rule, except on eight occasions when the House reached a consensus to allow it.
“Members can see that in almost four decades, this Rule, this device of Rule 267 has been invoked in the House on rarest of rare occasions,” he said. “Rule 267 enables suspensions of a rule only to take up matters already listed for the day and not to introduce any unrelated subjects.” The Chairman reiterated that a valid notice must relate to an item already on the day’s agenda, specify the rule sought to be suspended, present clear grounds for invoking Rule 267, and avoid seeking suspension where another rule already provides such a mechanism. Only notices that meet these criteria and receive the Chair’s prior consent will be taken up.
In view of these observations/clarification, Rule 267 notices not meeting these requirements will not be taken into consideration, he said. “Other Parliamentary devices can raise any matter of urgent public importance; thus, the notices received under Rule 267 are not admitted.” Stating that urgent matters can be raised through other Parliamentary tools, the Chairman ruled that the two Rule 267 notices received on Monday do not meet the required parameters and therefore stand disallowed.
Leader of the Opposition and Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge said MPs give notices under Rule 267 because there is no chance of getting a short-duration or even a short notice question.
“We are not getting the opportunity to discuss important things immediately. When we raise and request you (for a discussion on an important issue), the government is avoiding,” he said.
He urged the chairman not to give a “bulldozer” ruling, as he is the supreme authority and can do away with any rule and allow any discussion.
Leader of the House and Union Minister J P Nadda said the government has not avoided any discussion.
In the last session too, the government agreed to discuss the issue the opposition wanted taken up, and this time electoral reforms will be discussed next week. “So this impression should not go that the government avoids any discussion. We are ready to discuss every topic,” he added. PTI ANZ DRR DRR
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.