Polls round the corner, Haryana govt may skip House meet, dissolve assembly

Faced with a constitutional predicament of its own making, the BJP government in Haryana is contemplating to dissolve the state legislature. The council of ministers led by chief minister (CM) Nayab Saini may recommend the dissolution of the assembly to the governor on Wednesday to avoid summoning the House before the expiry of the six-month period from the last sitting of the assembly, a mandatory constitutional requirement. The last sitting of the state assembly was on March 13 and a session has to be convened before September 12. The state goes to the assembly polls on October 5.

The dissolution of the state legislature under Article 174 of the Constitution will avert a constitutional crisis for the Nayab Singh Saini government, parliamentary affairs experts said. As per Article 174 of the Constitution, the governor shall from time to time summon the House or each House of the legislature of the state to meet at such time and place as he thinks fit, but six months shall not intervene between its last sitting in one session and the date appointed for its first sitting in the next session.

Top court answers reference on applicability of Constitutional provisions

Answering three questions referred for its opinion by then President APJ Abdul Kalam, a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court on October 28, 2002, had held that the provisions of Article 174 are mandatory in character so far as the time period between two sessions is concerned in respect of live assemblies and not dissolved assemblies. Article 174 pertaining to sessions of the state legislature, prorogation and dissolution and Article 324 pertaining to superintendence, direction and control of elections to be vested in an Election Commission (EC) operating in different fields. Article 174 does not deal with elections, which is the primary function of the Election Commission under Article 324. Therefore, the question of one yielding to the other does not arise. There is scope of harmonising both in a manner indicated supra. The apex court also said Article 174 is not relatable to a dissolved assembly.

Former additional secretary of Haryana Vidhan Sabha Ram Narain Yadav said the stipulation under Article 174– a session of the state legislature has to be convened before the expiry of the six-month period from the last sitting of the assembly – is very clear. “If the state government does not convene a session of the assembly because of the preoccupation of political parties with the assembly elections, then it will have to dissolve the House. If the state government fails to do any of the two, then Article 356 pertaining to provisions in case of failure of constitutional machinery in the states gets attracted,’’ he said. Yadav who is an expert in parliamentary procedure said constitutional scheme, constitutional law and debates of the Constituent assembly on Articles 85, 174 and 356 succinctly endorse this position.

Why assembly session was not convened

Political experts said the BJP’s lack of confidence and the announcement of assembly elections on August 16 were two clear reasons for not summoning the House. The state government’s reluctance to the idea of convening a short monsoon session of the assembly was evident from the promulgation of a number of ordinances by the governor on the advice of the council of ministers. The CM had indicated that ordinances promulgated by the governor, which are valid for six months, will be replaced with bills tabled in the Vidhan Sabha when the new government is formed in October.

The BJP government was under stress after three Independent MLAs – Sombir Sangwan (Dadri), Randhir Gollen (Pundri) and Dharam Pal Gonder (Nilokheri)– who were supporting it backed out in June. With its post-2019 assembly poll ally, the Jannayak Janta Party (JJP), with whom the BJP broke ties on March 12, also deciding not to extend support to the government, the arithmetic in the state assembly had changed with the numbers for the BJP and its allies coming down. Leader of Opposition Bhupinder Singh Hooda had demanded the dismissal of the minority BJP government stating that it needs to be dismissed by the governor to stop horse trading. Hooda had said there was a possibility of some JJP MLAs defying party whip to support the government in the House.

The announcement of the assembly elections also served as a damper as most of the political parties and their MLAs got busy with poll preparations. Political experts said by not summoning the session of the assembly or dissolving the assembly, the Nayab Saini government would open itself to criticism for violating the constitutional provisions.