New Parliament Building: For many days, the government and the opposition parties have been fighting back and forth regarding the new Parliament House. Opposition by PM Modi new parliament building They are protesting against the inauguration and many parties have even spoken of boycotting this programme. Meanwhile, the matter of the new Parliament House has now reached the Supreme Court, on which the Supreme Court will give its verdict today.
Demand for inauguration from President Murmu in Supreme Court
A PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court yesterday regarding this matter, the petition has demanded that the Supreme Court should direct the Center that the new Parliament House should be inaugurated by the President of India Draupadi Murmu on May 28. The PIL also states that “the Lok Sabha Secretariat has violated the Constitution by not inviting the President for the inauguration”.
Violation of Indian Constitution – Advocate Jaya Sukin
The PIL, filed by advocate Jaya Sukin, states that the statement issued by the Lok Sabha Secretariat on May 18 and the invitation issued by the Secretary General, Lok Sabha, regarding the inauguration of the new Parliament House, is in violation of the Indian Constitution.
The work of the new Parliament House should also be done by the President.
The petition stated that the government has violated the Indian Constitution and the Constitution is not being respected. Parliament is the supreme legislative body of India. In India, the President has the power to summon and adjourn both the Houses, the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha, or to dissolve the Lok Sabha, so the work of the new Parliament House should also be done by the President.
Announcement of boycott of Parliament House inauguration
A total of 21 opposition parties including Congress, TMC and AAP have announced boycott of the inauguration of the new Parliament building. He has said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s decision to inaugurate the building without President Draupadi Murmu is “an insult to the President and also a violation of the Constitution”.
Comments are closed.