Speaker reserves ruling on governor’s ‘remark’

PATNA: State assembly Speaker Uday Narayan Choudhary on Monday reserved his ruling on the observation of governor Devanand Konwar that Choudhary was “not the right authority to decide interpretatively” if the Patna University (Amendment) Bill, 2010, and Bihar Universities (Amendment) Bill, 2010, were Money Bills or not.
Choudhary reserved his ruling on the matter after Leader of Opposition Abdul Bari Siddiqui said that the matter should be resolved at the level of Speaker himself and Governor, since they both enjoyed constitutional positions.
He added that the matter, in no case, should be debated in the House, since it would violate legislative convention and the integrity of constitutional positions. The governor was the custodian of the House, and all executive decisions were taken by the government in his name, Siddiqui said and quoted constitutional provisions and rules of executive business.
Earlier, BJP member Amarendra Pratap Singh raised the matter in the House through a point of information. Several members - Usha Sinha, Achyutanand, Vinod Narayan Jha, Rameshwar Paswan and Izhar Ahmad - also spoke.
Departing from the main issue, many MLAs pointed to various other matters of university administration. At this, Human Resources Development minister P K Shahi said that the main issue was the observation made by the Governor: if the Speaker had the right to interpret the status of the amendment Bills in question as Money Bills. He also said that all other matters raised in the House did not relate to the issue taken up.
Shahi added that the apex court on two occasions had ruled that only persons vested with rightful authority could take a decision on any matter.
At this stage, Siddiqui expressed his opinion, after which the Speaker said that he would give his ruling on the matter during the current session of the House itself.
Before deciding to “withhold” his assent to the two Bills, the Governor had observed that the Speaker “may not be the right authority to decide interpretatively the import and ramified implications of the Constitutional provisions” concerned, as well as “to what inherently constituted the ingredients of a deemed Money Bill.”