Neeraj Rohmetra
Jammu, Nov 10: Despite resignation by two National Conference (NC) members from the House Committee and letters written by Leader of Upper House, along with eight Congress legislators, the Chairman of Legislative Council Amrit Malhotra has written official letter to Minister for Medical Education, R S Chib, who is also leader of Upper House, justifying his decision to constitute a Housel Panel to probe allegations against Minister for PHE, Irrigation and Floor Control Taj Mohi-ud-Din.
According to top sources in Law Department, the Chairman while justifying his action in an official letter has categorically stated that the Committee comprising the Chairman and five members has been constituted in consonance with well-established Parliamentary practices and precedents.
The House Committee investigating the issue regarding alleged encroachment of forest land at Sedow, Shopian, which was constituted on October 11 comprised People’s Democratic Party (PDP) MLC – Murtaza Ahmad Khan as Chairman and four other members – Syed Rafiq Shah (Panther’s Party), Bashir Ahmad Magray (Congress) and Dr Bashir Ahmad Shah (Veeri) and Khalid Najib Suhrawardy (both from National Conference).
Sources pointed out that the letter of Chairman says, “In terms of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Council and the established Parliamentary Practices, the House Committees are constituted in two ways, either on a motion adopted by the House or nominated by the Presiding Officer, such an order is always issued by the Presiding Officer, under his hand and seal.”
“Government Business Rules are applicable only in respect of administrative actions and decisions concerning the Council Secretariat, while all issues relating to the business of the House and Parliamentary functions are governed by the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the House. Hence, any doubt regarding the issuance of the order constituting the House Committee under my hand and seal is misplaced”, the letter added.
Further elaborating on the issue of complainant (Syed Rafiq Shah) and his lone supporter being made the member of the Panel, the letter says, “let me also make it clear that as per well-established Parliamentary practices and precedents, a member who raises a demand for constitution of a House Committee is always nominated as a member of the Committee to give him an opportunity to present his case before the Committee”.
“The report of the Committee is debated and analyzed by the House when presented. There is no question of any member being Judge, as the report of Committee is simply of recommendary nature and acceptance or rejection of the same is within the sole discretion and pleasure of the House”.
Another misconception, the letter stated is that the Committee has been constituted against the Minister. “Though under the Rules of Procedure, there is nothing which debarred the constitution of a Committee against a Minister and there are ample precedents where the actions of the Ministers have been called in question by such Committees, yet the present committee hasn’t been constituted against Taj in his capacity as Minister, as no action taken by him in discharge of his duties as a Minister has been called in question”.
The letter added, “The Committee has been constituted to look into a specific issue of alleged illegal encroachment of forest land. The fact that the person accused of encroachment happens to be a Minister and member of another House is coincidental and collateral to the issue. Instead of extending any privilege or protective cover on this count, rather it was all the more important to enquire into the allegations leveled on the floor of the House to maintain sanctity and impartiality of the institution and the Chair”.
Rebutting the suggestion for legal advice on the subject, the letter states:, “I, while constituting the House Committee have no doubt about my incompetence or illegality of my action. There was and there is, no reason for seeking anybody’s advice in the matter. Suggestion for seeking legal advice in the matter are unsolicited and unwelcome”.
Further, the letter says, “so far as clearance, as claimed by of Taj Mohi-ud-Din by the Accountability Commission or Vigilance Commission is concerned, let the Minister submit such reports or clearances, so that the same are forwarded to the Committee for taking into consideration, while enquiring into the matter”.
The letter in its concluding paragraph says, “lastly, let me assure you that my decision of constituting the House Committee is bereft of any partiality or bias and is only based on the evidence produced before me. This decision was not guided by any other considerations whatsoever. Being the custodian of the rights and privileges of the members of the House, I am duty bound to listen to and satisfy every member of the House, be he from the treasury benches or from opposition benches. Before parting with this letter, I would like to know as to how and what sort of Constitutional crises has arisen due to the constitution of a Committee to look into the serious allegations of encroachment on forest land”.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel