Parliament ruckus: More in the offing?

What the nation watched on August 11 with fright on television sets was the first-of-its-kind performance depicting terror. The 'Honourable' Members of Parliament (MPs) of the Opposition benches were seen performing the demeaning acts of shouting, abusing, gesticulating, thumping, tearing the Rule Book and throwing the torn papers on the faces of not only the members on the treasury benches, but also on the Speaker/Chairman and other officers of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha! Sadly, even the marshalls, including the woman marshalls, were not spared by these uncontrollable 'Honourable' goons.

To such a pathetic situation, reaction of the MPs from both sides was, to say the least, strange and devoid of logic and law. While the actors of the anti-democracy drama in the Parliament held that they were just exercising their 'rights' as privileged members of their respective Houses and conveniently passed on the buck for the ruckus to the treasury benches, the treasury benches, on the other, sermonised that it was the responsibility of all the members to ensure smooth and orderly functioning of the august Houses. Added to this, Chairman of the Rajya Sabha informed the House that the previous night he could not sleep pondering over the pandemonium in the House bringing disrepute to the democracy, and literally broke down.

Against this background, it would be apposite to have a glance at our Constitution. The fundamental duties of citizens (that include, the MPs, MLAs etc) were added to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment in 1976 under Article 51 A, part 4 A following the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee. The inclusion of fundamental duties was inspired by the Constitution of the then USSR, now called Russia. Initially, there were 10 fundamental duties enlisted, but one more duty to provide educational opportunities to children, between the ages of 6 years to 14 years, was inserted by the 86th Constitution Amendment Act, 2002.

A cursory look at some of the fundamental duties would convince even a layman that the MPs, MLAs and other elected peoples' representatives have no licence to behave like street rowdies. According to the Constitution, it shall be the duty of every citizen of India, inter alia, to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions…, to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people…,to safeguard public property and to abjure violence…, to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement, etc.

Further, the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of both Houses amply empower the Speaker/Chairman of the House to take necessary steps for maintaining the order in the House and keeping the dignity and decorum of the House. The said Rules, a complete Bible of parliamentary procedure, also mandate that the members shall conduct themselves in a befitting manner.

Thus, there is no ambiguity in procedure. From a plain reading of the relevant Articles of the Constitution and the Rule Book makes it crystal clear that it is the responsibility of the Speaker/Chairman of the respective House to ensure that the business of the House is carried out in a smooth, orderly and dignified manner. In short, it is the Speaker/Chairman who will call the shots. If he fails, for whatever reasons, to discharge his Constitutional obligation, then better he quits the position or if he does not, let the parliament remove him from his coveted post of the Speaker/Chairman. Thus, there is no gain saying that all members or only the members of the treasury benches have the onus of conducting the business as per Rules.

If the majority ruled BJP-led NDA government does not realise the seriousness of the situation, then after the attack on parliament by Afzal Guru and his terrorist gang, the present gang of anti-national terrorists masquerading as MPs would leave no stone unturned to stage many more attacks in a near future irrespective of their outcome.

SC on payment of gratuity

The apex court bench comprising Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice AS Bopanna in a judgement relating to Krishna Gopal Tiwary and other vs Union of India has held that the date of enhanced gratuity amount of Rs 10 lakh by the Amendment Act is with effect from April 24, 2010 and not with retrospective effect. The appellants, the employees of Coal India Limited, had claimed the enhanced gratuity with effect from January 2007, in terms of an office memorandum of the Union government when the upper limit of gratuity was Rs 3.5 lakh.

SC judge Fali Nariman retires

The doyen of Indian judiciary, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, laid down his office as the Judge of the Supreme Courtof India on August 12, after serving the nation in that capacity for seven years.

During his tenure, Justice Nariman has authored many landmark judgements, including the illegal migrants of Assam, publication of criminal antecedents of candidates within 48 hours by political parties, restraining the Uttar Pradesh government from conducting Kanwar Yatra amidst Covid-19 pandemic, directing the government to install CCTV cameras in all police stations, reviving the doctrine of manifest arbitrariness, constitutional validity of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act,2020, treating the home buyers as financial creditors, declaring Section 87 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which provided for automatic stay as unconstitutional, striking down Section 377 of IPC and granting equal protection to the members of the LGBTQ community, declaring the Triple Talaq unconstitutional, decriminalisation of the offence of Adultery as defined in Section 497 of IPC etc. At a farewell function, rich accolades were paid to the retiring Judge by both the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Bar Association.

TS HC transfers 59 judges in one go

The Telangana High Court has recently issued transfer orders for as many as 59 judges of the subordinate courts. Considered as the 'massive' exercise of its kind by the legal fraternity, the judges transferred include 45 district judges or additional district judges, while 14 are senior judges.