Haryana Vidhan Sabha Speaker Harvinder Kalyan has rejected the explanation submitted by Leader of Opposition Bhupinder Singh Hooda over the Congress Legislature Party’s parallel “mock Vidhan Sabha" held inside the Assembly complex on April 27, terming the response “vague, misleading, factually incorrect and contrary to constitutional and parliamentary norms."
In his response, the Speaker said Hooda’s reply neither addressed the three issues raised by him nor expressed any regret or remorse. “The reply is vague, misleading, factually incorrect and contrary to constitutional and parliamentary norms. It also lacks any expression of regret or remorse and contains unfounded advice, making it unsatisfactory," Kalyan observed.
The Speaker had sought clarification after Congress legislators organised a parallel session in the Assembly parking area during the special session on April 27. He had asked Hooda to explain the constitutional basis for holding the parallel session, the reasons for calling the special session unconstitutional, and the grounds for describing the resolution supporting the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam as unconstitutional.
Rejecting Hooda’s explanation, Kalyan said linking the special Assembly session with an alleged “censure motion" was “entirely baseless and untrue" as no such motion was included in the agenda of the Business Advisory Committee or introduced in the House. “The Congress boycott of the session was based on incorrect facts and was a deliberate decision," he said.
The Speaker reiterated that the special session was convened by the Governor under Article 174 of the Constitution and its proceedings were protected under Article 194. He said political disagreement could not render a constitutionally convened session unconstitutional.
Kalyan further alleged that Congress members unauthorisedly used the designated media briefing area to conduct a parallel “mock Vidhan Sabha", electing Speakers and declaring the official Assembly session unconstitutional. Such actions, he said, “lowered the dignity and prestige of the House" and tarnished the image of the Assembly. He added that while democratic expression was important, it must remain consistent with constitutional institutions and parliamentary traditions.
