A
petition has been filed in the Delhi High Court seeking its intervention in
the matter of the election of the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha.
The Lok Sabha has not yet elected its Deputy Speaker. This appears to be
the first such petition before a court of law on a matter
exclusively within the domain of the Lok Sabha. One cannot
resist the temptation of taking the position that since the election of
the Deputy Speaker is to be done exclusively by the members in the House,
the court’s intervention is not permissible. But, on closer scrutiny,
the election of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker, though done by the House,
is as per the mandate of the Constitution.120 It is
not a routine government business of the House, decided by the
Speaker in consultation with the leader140 (1) of
the House as indicated in Rule 25 of the House Rules. Article 93 of the
Constitution mandates that the House160 shall elect a
Speaker and Deputy Speaker after the constitution of a new House, or after a
vacancy arises in either of these offices.
The present Lok Sabha was
constituted on 24th May, 2019. On June 19, the Speaker was elected.
But even after two years and four months, a Deputy Speaker has not been
elected. The normal practice has been to elect a Deputy Speaker the day
after the Speaker’s election. In the 70-year long history of independent
India’s Parliament,240 the election of the Deputy Speaker
has never been delayed for as long as 28 months. The Speaker and
the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya
Sabha are referred to as officers280 of Parliament in our
Constitution. They are elected by (2) the respective Houses. Their
duties have been defined in the Constitution. The Deputy Speaker performs the duties
of the Speaker when the office of the Speaker is vacant. He also acts320
as the Speaker when the Speaker is absent from any sitting of the
House. When the Deputy Speaker performs the duties of the Speaker, he has all
the powers and responsibilities of the latter. Similarly, when the Deputy
Speaker acts as360 Speaker in the House, he assumes
all the powers of the Speaker in the matter of regulating the proceedings
of the House. His rulings in the House have the same status as those of the
Speaker, and the Speaker cannot sit in appeal over his rulings.
The Constitution recognises
the importance of the office of the Deputy Speaker.420
Therefore, the House cannot treat it as a post of no importance or redundant.
The office of the Deputy Speaker had been an essential part of the central
legislative assembly (3) from 1921 onwards. Even in the Constituent
Assembly, a deputy president was considered essential. It is a moot
point whether the issue of non-election of the Deputy Speaker can be judicially
reviewed. 480 If it is judicially reviewable,
the court may have to issue a direction to the House to elect the
Deputy Speaker. But the procedure laid down in Rule 8 of the Lok Sabha’s Rules
of Procedure casts the entire responsibility for setting in motion
the process for election of the Deputy Speaker on the Speaker. As per this
rule, it is the Speaker who is to fix the date of election. In
the case of election of Speaker, 560 it is the
President who fixes the date and the President does so on the advice of the Union
council of ministers. But the Speaker is not required to act on the advice
of the council of ministers. He can independently fix600
the date of election of the (4) Deputy Speaker. Thus, the whole question
of election of Deputy Speaker hinges on whether the Speaker fixes a date. When this
is the case, if the court intervenes, it can issue a640
direction to the Speaker to fix the date of election. As a matter of fact,
the House is not absolutely helpless in the matter. It can adopt a
resolution requesting the Speaker to fix the date for election of the Deputy Speaker.
Such a resolution is admissible under the Rules 171 and 173 of the House. No
party in the700 House can take a stand that
the House does not need a Deputy Speaker because Article 93 mandates
that the House shall720 elect a Deputy Speaker. No one
can also say that the House may postpone it further because the above Article
uses the words “as soon as may be”. It has already been delayed inordinately.
In any case, the Speaker can put an end to this controversy (5)
by fixing the date of election on his own. If he does so, the
Constitution and the rules of the House will be on his side. That would be
a graceful act800 rather than wait for the direction of the
court.
Elections can induce impractical and illogical promises
by political parties, like free electricity and health services, reduced
water and power tariff, waivers for loan and bill defaulters, 80 per
cent jobs for locals, 840 double income for farmers and so
on. However, a culture of competitive freebies currently being seen in Punjab
can take this delusion to a whole new level which is far removed from the
budgetary and infrastructure realities of the State that struggles to
pay salaries and faces protests by job-seekers. The jury may be out on its
capacity to alter electoral outcomes, but this culture of free
offerings is not restricted to the border State of Punjab. The poll-bound
States of Uttarakhand, Goa, Manipur and (6) Uttar Pradesh may also
witness the same kind of culture. As pragmatism is laid to rest in
favour of unrealistic projections in Punjab, each party is trying to
outdo the other in raising the quantum960 of free offerings
to the common man. Even the thought of fiscal prudence or structural changes
stands no chance980 in front of unworkable freebies
that could quickly lose meaning in the absence of an attempt to address core
issues. Each citizen, and not just voters, deserves better answers to persistent
questions as to why a power-surplus State fails miserably in
supplying uninterrupted power, and what accounts for the high tariff. Tamil
Nadu is another State which has made a name for itself in the
freebies culture to attract voters. It got a reality check from the Madras High
Court ahead of the election this April, when the High Court advised
leaders to stop this and engage in promoting infrastructural facilities1080
instead. This did not put (7) an end to the parties’ flirtation,
but the message was loud and clear that political parties must
not reduce their duty to irresponsible populism.
The issue of criminalisation of politics has hit the headlines1120
once again. The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over
the alleged nexus between bureaucrats, especially police officers, and
politicians. The Chief Justice of India remarked that he was at
one time thinking of creating standing committees headed by the chief
justices of the high courts to examine atrocities and complaints
against bureaucrats, particularly police officers. In recent times, many
senior police officers have come under the scanner for socializing
with politicians in a questionable manner. Undoubtedly, such allegations
against top1200 police officers undermine people’s faith in
the rule of law and dent the credibility of the State system. Given the
fact that the political class stands accused of wrongdoing in
such cases, it would be unrealistic to expect governments to
take corrective measures. Having identified (8) the problem, it
is incumbent upon the Supreme Court to issue necessary directions to rid1260
India of this menace.
The Government has extended the Midday Meal scheme to students of pre-primary
classes. The Midday Meal1280 scheme initiative was
launched in 1995 with the aim of providing at least one nutritional meal every
day to children studying in primary classes in Government schools and Government-aided
schools across India. The larger objective was to improve enrolment and attendance
in these institutions. Later, the upper primary classes were also
brought under its ambit. Over the years, the scheme has often been in
the news for wrong reasons like poor quality of food, violation of the menu
guidelines, shortage of cooks, theft of food grains and so on. In
December 2018, the Supreme Court had imposed fines on some States for
not properly monitoring the implementation of the scheme. The Comptroller and
Auditor General (9) has repeatedly flagged issues such as1400
the unhygienic conditions in which the food is prepared, the
inferior quality of infrastructure and incorrect reporting by the authorities
about the coverage of schools and students. It is praiseworthy that the
Centre has directed the States and Union Territories1440
to adopt the Direct Benefit Transfer system for providing honorarium to
cooks and helpers so as to make the payment process transparent and plug
leakages. India, which was ranked 94th out of 107 countries on the Global
Hunger Index last year, is among the worst performers worldwide
in terms of child wasting and child stunting. The Midday Meal scheme has a key
role to play in addressing the nutritional needs of crores of children,
particularly those from poor and underprivileged families. It can be a
game-changer only if there is zero tolerance to various (10)
lapses which have a bearing on the health of kids. Strict monitoring and fixing
of accountability can go a long way in making the scheme realise its immense
potential.1570
