The government and the opposition are saying that everyone should be united on the Mhadei water diversion issue, but in reality, both are doing just the opposite.
Of course, everyone agrees that the Mhadei should be saved, but the way to save it, is where nobody agrees. Based on recent events, which unfolded, petitioning the court seems like the lone option. Political discussions, meetings and delegations to Delhi appear to be futile attempts. The opposition seems sure that these paths won’t work. However, the government seems hopeful. This hope oozes from the speeches of Chief Minister or ruling party ministers, expressed in the State Legislative Assembly as well.
Although the government is saying that it is clear on what to do, its confusion in decision making is clear as water. The way the government presented the resolution in the Assembly in this regard made this confusion more evident. The opposition had demanded that the Mhadei issue be discussed in the Assembly and that an extra day be dedicated to it.
But the government did not agree to this demand and decided to discuss the issue on the last day of the brief session. But it was still not clear from the government’s side under which rule and in what way the issue would be discussed, which led to more confusion. The government arranged for the discussion, but under the wrong rule. The government decided to hold the discussion under Assembly Rules of Procedure Rule 64, but did not realise that this rule is for private members. The government cannot use this rule as the same is applicable only when a member is trying to seek an urgent discussion. The Rule states how the notice for the same should be issued and the content it needs to carry. Three MLAs need to sign as per the rule and the government arranged for the same. Under Aleixo Sequeira, Krishna Salkar and Ulhas Tuenkar, this discussion was requested, which means the same was not governmental, but private. The content, which was mentioned in this notice, was like a resolution, but under this rule, it was supposed to hold only a discussion. There was no voting on the issue as per the rule. A member presents the matter, while others discuss and the topic ends with the response from the ministers of the departments concerned. This is where the government suffered the first defeat, as it would have gained some weight only if the discussion was held by the government. The government did realise this mistake later and improved upon it. The chief minister interrupted when Sequeira tabled the resolution in the House and informed the member that the State is converting the matter into government resolution.
The permission for the same was sought from the Speaker and then the resolution was taken up for discussion. However, it is questionable, if a chief minister can convert a short-term topic of discussion into a government resolution. And, if they can, then under which law? The government has stated that the resolution has been converted with the reference to Rule No. 102, but again, it is questionable whether the Rule 102 gives such permission. The Rule 102 allows the government to move a resolution, but a procedure has been mentioned in the same rule. As per the rule, a prior notice of seven days has to be given before moving the resolution. Once the Legislature Secretary receives the notice, he/she is supposed to provide a copy of the resolution to all the members within 48 hours. But courtesy to the government’s haphazard way of taking decisions, this procedure was not followed. The government cannot file a resolution or hold a discussion whenever they feel like.
Notably, no one objected to this, as everyone wanted the discussion on Mhadei to take place. But the government’s action has exposed its confusion. One thing the government has to understand is that whenever they want to ask something from the Centre, the government is supposed to pass the resolution and send it to the Central government. This is not the first time this has happened. Another such notable incident took place when the Assembly first moved a private member’s resolution and later a governmental one while demanding a status of full-fledged State within the Indian Union. The government made the mistake of holding a private discussion in the assembly but later rectified its error and passed the resolution while also constituting a House Committee. As per the opposition, this has no use whatsoever and it would be interesting to see what the future holds.
