- July 22, 2023
- Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
- Category: DPN Topics
Subject : Polity
Section: Parliament and Legislature
- Rule in Lok Sabha allows an MP to urge the Speaker to adjourn the House’s business “to discuss a definite matter of urgent public importance”. The Speaker has to decide whether to allow the MP to move the motion.
- It results in the House dropping its scheduled list of business to discuss this urgent matter.
- The adjournment motion is a form of censure of the government. It originated in the House of Commons in the United Kingdom, and started its journey in India under the rules of the pre-independent bicameral legislature established under the Government of India Act of 1919.
- The Council of Ministers became collectively responsible to Lok Sabha.
- As a result, in 1952, the adjournment motion found a place in the Lok Sabha Rule Book and it was left out of Rajya Sabha.
- Second, was the view of Lok Sabha Speakers on the use of adjournment motions by members.
- Given the availability of other procedural devices in the Rule Book for MP to raise urgent matters, LokSabha Speakers have been reluctant to allow adjournment motions.
- Most Lok Sabha have spentless than 3% of their time on adjournment motions.
In Rajya Sabha
- Over the years, Rajya Sabha MPs have used Rule 267 to suspend Question Hour in the House to raise urgent matter
- Adjournment motion is introduced only in the Lok Sabha to draw the attention of the House to a definite matter of urgent public importance.
- It involves an element of censure against the government, therefore Rajya Sabha is not permitted to make use of this device
- It is regarded as an extraordinary device as it interrupts the normal business of the House. It needs the support of 50 members to be admitted.
- The discussion on this motion should last for not less than two hours and thirty minutes.
- However, right to move a motion for an adjournment of the business of the House is subject to the following restrictions. i.e. It should:
- Raise a matter which is definite, factual, urgent and of public importance.
- Not cover more than one matter.
- Be restricted to a specific matter of recent occurrence.
- Not raise a question of privilege.
- Not revive discussion on a matter that has been discussed in the same session.
- Not deal with any matter that is under adjudication of court.
- Not raise any question that can be raised on a distinct motion.