9-member Business Advisory Committee constituted

Jammu, Mar 12: Speaker J&K Legislative Assembly (LA) Abdul Rahim Rather Wednesday constituted a 9-member Business Advisory Committee (BAC) after the members from the main opposition party strongly objected to the conduct of House proceedings without having it (BAC).

The issue witnessed a verbal duel between the members of the ruling combine, mainly the National Conference and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Senior BJP MLA and former minister Sham Lal Sharma also locked horns with the Minister for Education, H&ME and Social Welfare Departments, Sakina Itoo. Deputy Chief Minister Surinder Kumar Choudhary too interjected to take on the agitating BJP MLAs, who were creating a ruckus on this issue.

NC Chief Whip Mubarak Gul, who was in the Chair, stated that the Speaker would give a ruling on this account.

Later, the Speaker settled the issue while ruling that no rule was violated as the Leader of the House was consulted while framing the provisional calendar of the session.

In the evening, through a notification, the Speaker, who will be the chairman of the Committee, nominated the Leader of Opposition and BJP MLA Sunil Kumar Sharma; NC MLAs Ali Mohammad Sagar and Mubarak Gul; CPI-M MLA M Y Tarigami; Congress MLA Ghulam Ahmad Mir; Peoples Conference MLA Sajad Gani Lone; PDP MLA Mohammad Fayaz and independent MLA Choudhary Mohammad Akram to serve as members of BAC.

The committee has been constituted by the Speaker, under Rule 317 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the J&K LA.

Earlier, during the day, in the House, the objection vis-à-vis non-existence of BAC was raised by BJP MLA and the former minister Sham Lal Sharma during a debate on the demands for grants vis-à-vis Departments of Education; Health & Medical Education; Social Welfare and Higher Education.

“It is strange that the Business Advisory Committee has not been constituted. The proceedings, without having it, are null and void as they were conducted not in consonance with the Business Rules,” Sham pointed out.

He raised this point after Mubarak Gul (Chair) said that instead of a second sitting, only time during the first sitting would be extended up to 2 pm.

Gul assured Sham to look into the issue raised by him.

BJP MLAs and other legislators were insisting the Chair convene a second sitting as all MLAs wanted to participate in the debate. “This will give opportunity to all members to raise their constituency-specific issues during the debate,” the Leader of the Opposition Sunil Kumar Sharma requested Gul.

The latter, however, said, “Second sitting won’t be possible due to the holy month of Ramzan. However, I’ll extend the time of the first sitting to facilitate MLAs to speak during the debate.”

At this point in time, Sakina Itoo intervened saying, “The Chair can take a decision on this issue (extension of time). However, a second sitting won’t be feasible due to the holy month of Ramzan. They (Sham and others) are talking as it’s a very big issue (non-existence of BAC).”

Hearing this, all BJP members including Sham Sharma, Pawan Gupta, R S Pathania and Balwant Singh Mankotia agitated against her remarks. “We are quoting rules,” they shouted.

“As if only you know the rules and not others. Why are you not letting me speak on this issue? This is not done. I too have a right to speak. Have patience,” she countered.

Objecting to her remarks, Sham remarked, “Now you will teach us how to behave.”

Gul, while trying to pacify both sides, ruled, “Speaker Sahib will decide this issue.”

Sakina reiterated that it was the discretion of the Chair to take a call on an extension of time or otherwise. “They are behaving as if only they know the law and rules. We all are senior members. We all know the rules. This dictatorship will not be allowed,” she retorted.

Pawan Gupta raised a point of order objecting to the clubbing of demands of grants of three crucial demands.

BJP members kept on agitating; Sham Sharma even threatened to stage a walkout on this issue; though he did not after being cajoled by Gul, who said that the Speaker would address his (Sham’s) concern.

The uproar prompted the Deputy Chief Minister to intervene.

“As per the Business Rules, you (Speaker) have the discretionary power. You can make decisions in consultation with the Leader of the House. They (opposition members) quote only those rules which suit them. This House cannot run on the whims of a particular person. If there are certain shortcomings somewhere; that’s their legacy. We have inherited from them. Earlier they did not speak. But now they are teaching us the rules. You have twisted rules,” the Deputy Chief Minister took a dig at the opposition benches.

However, this further agitated BJP MLAs. Sham Sharma retorted that he was referring to the Rules of Procedure vis-à-vis BAC. “My objective is that the authority and dignity of the House should not be compromised or lowered. But he (DyCM) is making it a personalized issue. I believe there is some confusion on this aspect among the officials. The Business Advisory Committee has not been constituted,” Sham Sharma said.

BJP MLA Balwant Singh Mankotia too retorted, saying, “Rules are framed by the House and not the government.”

“As per convention, the provisional calendar is issued before the session. There has been practice of constituting a Business Advisory Committee as well. However, as per rules, the provisional calendar is issued by the Speaker in consultation with the Leader of the House. After issuing the calendar, during the (course of) session if we feel that the Business Advisory Committee is required to give some suggestions, then it is constituted. This has been a past practice. A provisional calendar has been issued as has been the practice and as per rules. Rules have not been violated,” the Speaker informed the House while quoting the rules.

He said that as per rules, the Leader of the House was consulted while preparing the provisional calendar.

“But if this is the concern of the House that the members have to give certain suggestions vis-à-vis the proceedings. I have no objection in constituting the Committee. I’ll constitute it and will listen to your opinions. But otherwise, rules are very clear on this subject,” Rather asserted, while reading out the rules.

Following it, Sham Sharma said, “Given your (Rather’s) experience, I will not contest what you have stated. Yet I was also quoting the rule book. One should not get this impression that I was misleading the House and was not correct.”

Rather said, “No. You are not wrong. I’ve already said that this (constituting BAC) has been a convention. They have been constituted in the past and should be constituted.”