New Delhi, February 15 – In a 1954 debate in Parliament regarding a resolution to remove then Speaker GV Mavalankar, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru emphasized that MPs are not bound by any directives and must consider the matter regardless of party affiliation.
He urged Lok Sabha MPs to consider the issue not through the lens of party politics, but as a matter concerning the dignity of the House.
With the focus on the Opposition’s notice to move a resolution for the removal of Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, past instances where such situations arose are also being examined.
One such instance occurred on December 18, 1954, when the Opposition moved a resolution to remove then Speaker Mavalankar. This was eventually passed after over 50 members supported it, and a debate ensued.
During this debate, the Opposition, despite being in the minority, strongly criticized Nehru and accused him of being partisan.
Nehru, in response, said, "I would like to address the House in my capacity and the high privilege of being the leader of this House, and not as a leader of the majority party. As far as the majority party is concerned, I would like to tell them that none of them are bound by any directive; they can vote as they see fit. This is a matter for the House, for each individual, regardless of party affiliation."
"Therefore, let us consider this not as a party issue, but as members of this House. This matter affects the Speaker, of course, but it also affects the high dignity of this House as Parliament, and it affects the first citizen of this country, the Speaker of this House," he said.
Nehru emphasized the seriousness of the matter when it comes to the honor of Parliament.
He stated that the actions and decisions concerning the Speaker have implications for everyone who claims to be a member of the House.
"I wish members to realize this, because I have felt sad and deeply saddened by this matter," he said. "We have known the Speaker for many years, and we have seen him function. It is possible that some of us may not have the same opinion about him as others do. It is possible."
"It has happened that some of us have not particularly liked a decision or ruling of his. It is one thing to disagree with a ruling or to express dissatisfaction, or even to feel slightly irritated about something that has happened. These things happen. But it is completely different to challenge the integrity of the person in whose keeping the honor of this House rests," Nehru had said.
"When we challenge his integrity, we betray our countrymen and indeed the world that we are weak and insignificant. This is the seriousness of the situation. It is up to you to decide because we are showing the world and our country that we are weak, quarrelsome people who indulge in trivial matters and make accusations without considering the consequences," he had said.
"I do not say that it is impossible to move a motion against the Speaker. Of course, the Constitution allows it. Nobody challenges the right of the Opposition or any Member of the House to move such a motion. I do not deny that right, since it has been granted by the Constitution. The point is not the legal right, but the propriety; the desirability of doing so," he said.
Responding to examples provided by the Opposition, Nehru said, "Mr. (S S) More, in his soft and gentle voice, often contains many harsh criticisms, spoke about what happened to the head of a king in England in the 17th century. He also discussed the practices of the British House of Commons 200 years ago. I listened with amazement. Here we are in the 20th century, in the Republic of India, and we are being told about what happened in the Middle Ages or some other time in England."
"It is true that we follow to a considerable extent the practices of the British Parliament, but it is also true that even the practices of the British Parliament are not governed by what happened in the 17th century," he said.
"But apart from that, we are not concerned with what happened in the British Parliament. We are concerned with the honor of our Parliament, and we are concerned with the honor of the person who holds the dignity and prestige of this Parliament," he said.
"I listened to a number of speeches delivered from the opposite side. It was a display of incompetence, frivolity, and lack of substance," he said.
Nehru then strongly defended the Speaker and criticized the Opposition for questioning his integrity.
The Congress had a strong majority, with over 360 members, and the resolution was defeated by a voice vote.
In 1966, a resolution against Speaker Sardar Hukam Singh failed to pass after it could not secure the required 50 votes.
On April 15, 1987, the Opposition moved a resolution for the removal of then Speaker Balram Jakhar.
Intervening in the debate, Rajiv Gandhi quoted Nehru’s remarks from the 1954 resolution debate and criticized the Opposition for questioning the Speaker's integrity. The resolution was defeated by a voice vote.
In December 2024, the Opposition submitted a notice in the Rajya Sabha seeking the removal of then Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar as Chairman of the upper house, alleging partisan conduct.
However, the notice was rejected at the preliminary stage due to procedural reasons.
A notice to move a resolution for the removal of Birla was submitted by Opposition members last Tuesday.
This notice will be listed after the start of the second phase of the Budget session on March 9. Sources have said a speedy review will be conducted as per the rules.