Jagdeep Dhankhar draws curtains on a stormy Rajya Sabha run
Dhankhar was elected Vice-President in August 2022 and his term as the Rajya Sabha Chairman began on a controversial note during the Winter Session that year as he called the Supreme Court's 2015 judgment striking down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act a 'glaring instance' of 'severe compromise' of parliamentary sovereignty and disregard of the 'mandate of the people'.
Since then, there have been several instances when he and Opposition MPs have not seen eye to eye.
In August 2023, Dhankhar told the Opposition that he 'could not and would not' direct Prime Minister Narendra Modi to be present in the House as it was the PM's prerogative like any other MP to come to Parliament. He made this statement as the Opposition benches continued to demand the PM's presence in the Rajya Sabha to address them on the issue of violence in Manipur.
The ties between the Rajya Sabha Chairman and the Opposition hit a low during the Winter Session last year when 146 MPs were suspended from both Houses of Parliament, mostly over their demand for Union Home Minister Amit Shah's statement on a Parliament security breach, followed by a discussion on the matter. It was the highest-ever number of suspensions in a Parliament session.
As the proceedings came to a halt, Dhankhar wrote to Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in the Upper House, about the 'acrimony and disruptions'. Kharge replied saying that 'he was firmly in favour of dialogue and discussion'. In his letter, Dhankhar highlighted that the latter's 'refusal to meet him to resolve the political stalemate' was 'not in sync with parliamentary practices' and sought a meeting. Kharge had declined Dhankhar's invitation and in a letter said that the mass suspension of MPs was 'premeditated' and 'weaponised' by the ruling party to sabotage parliamentary practices.
In June 2024, Dhankhar courted controversy after Kharge entered the Well of House during a protest against paper leaks, with Dhankhar saying this was the first time that a LoP had done such a thing and called it a 'stain' on Parliament. Kharge responded by saying he was trying to grab the attention of the Chairman who was looking towards the Treasury benches.
In July 2024, Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal questioned the manner in which the Upper House was being run by Dhankhar and claimed that in no country the presiding officer of a House 'frequently interrupts' members during their speeches.
The same month, Dhankhar said the RSS has 'unimpeachable credentials' and Constitutional rights to contribute to the development of the nation. 'RSS is an organisation which is a global think tank of the highest order…,' he said in the House while responding to a comment from Samajwadi Party MP Ramji Lal Suman that the government's main criterion for appointments was if a person belongs to the RSS.
In September 2024, in an apparent reference to Lok Sabha LoP Rahul Gandhi, Dhankhar, without naming him, said nothing was more condemnable than someone holding a Constitutional post becoming 'part of enemies of the nation'. Dhankhar was speaking at Parliament to the third batch of the Rajya Sabha internship programme. During his visit to the United States that week, Gandhi said 'love, respect, and humility' were missing from Indian politics.
In December last year, Dhankhar became the first person holding one of the top two constitutional posts to face the prospect of impeachment as the Opposition submitted a notice to move a no-confidence motion against him, a first in Indian Parliamentary history.
However, after 60 INDIA bloc MPs gave a notice in the Rajya Sabha to bring a resolution for removal of Dhankhar, Deputy Chairman Harivansh rejected it, saying the petition was 'severely flawed', does not adhere to the requirement of 14 days' notice period and was 'drawn in haste and hurry' to 'mar the reputation' of Dhankhar and to 'damage the constitutional institution'.
Earlier this year, in April, after the Supreme Court ruling set a three-month timeline for the President to decide on Bills referred by Governors of states, Dhankhar had said that India cannot have a situation where the judiciary directs the President. While the Supreme Court ruling addressed the long-running dispute between Governors and Opposition-ruled state governments, Dhankhar added that his worries are at the 'very highest level' and asked, 'There is a directive to the President by a recent judgement. Where are we heading? What is happening in the country?'
Most recently, in June, Dhankhar waded into the political debate over the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble, referring to their addition to the Constitution by the Indira Gandhi government during the Emergency as 'sacrilege to the spirit of sanatan'. 'These words have been added as nasoor (festering wound). These words will create upheaval. Addition of these words in the Preamble during the Emergency signal betrayal of the mindset of the framers of the Constitution,' he said.
Before he was elected Vice-President, Dhankhar served as the Governor of West Bengal when he had several run-ins with the government of Mamata Banerjee and became a vocal critic of the state administration.
From the law and order situation in the state and post-poll violence to corruption accusations, alleged lapses in bureaucracy and the appointment of vice-chancellors in state universities, Dhankhar never shied away from criticising the government, which accused him of sitting on important BIlls. The situation took a turn for the worse when the state government in 2022 replaced the Governor with the CM as chancellor of state universities.
His relationship with Mamata Banerjee became so acrimonious that the CM even blocked Dhankhar on social media. His relationship with Speaker Biman Banerjee was no less bitter, with the Speaker in 2021 complaining to then President Ram Nath Kovind about Dhankhar allegedly interfering in matters of the government.
Born into a farmer's family at Kithana village in Jhunjhunu district in 1951, Dhankhar studied at a local government school before going to Sainik school in Chittorgarh. He studied law at the University of Rajasthan and became a professional lawyer, going on to serve as the president of the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association.
Dhankhar started his political journey with the Janata Dal and in 1989, he was elected to the Lok Sabha from Jhunjhunu. After that, he moved to state politics and was elected to the Rajasthan Assembly in 1993 from Kishangarh on a Congress ticket. He again tried his luck in the Lok Sabha elections in 1998 but lost from Jhunjhunu. Starting that year, Dhankhar served as a full-time senior advocate in the Supreme Court and in 2003 switched to the BJP. He advised the party on important legal matters.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
SP MP demands rollback of school merger
Lucknow: Samajwadi Party MP from Machhlishahr Priya Saroj has written to the Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan demanding review of the policy of 'integration of schools' in Uttar Pradesh and cancellation of the merger process. In her letter, Saroj said that the policy of integration of schools was being followed in Uttar Pradesh, which seems to be against the basic spirit of the Right to Education Act (RTE Act). "Under RTE Act, there is a provision that every child between the age of 6 to 14 years should be provided free and compulsory education within one kilometre of the nearest primary school from residence. If no school is available within a radius of one kilometre, then it is the responsibility of the govt to ensure admission of the child in the nearest school," she said. She said the current policy of the UP govt was violating the spirit of the Act. "This is hindering access to school for many children, leading more dropouts. Jobs of 2.5 lakh teachers and school staff of UP are also at risk," she said.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Only Dhankhar, PM Modi know real reason behind VP's exit: Mallikarjun Kharge
NEW DELHI: Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge on Sunday said he has no information on the actual reason for Jagdeep Dhankhar's resignation as Vice President, holding that it was for Dhankhar to tell what really happened, as the matter was between him and Prime Minister Narendra Modi . "I don't know all those details. He (Dhankhar) was always on the govt's side. He should say what happened," Kharge was reported as saying by news agency PTI, in response to a question on whether Dhankhar was forced to resign as he spoke in favour of farmers. Kharge was at Vijayapura in Karnataka. "When we raised several issues concerning farmers, the poor, international issues or foreign policy, he never used to give us an opportunity (in Rajya Sabha as its Chairman)," the Congress president said. "When we tried to raise issues by giving notices on issues regarding the poor, atrocities against women, Dalits and the downtrodden, and incidents like Hindu-Muslim clashes, he did not give us an opportunity. It (the reason for Dhankhar's resignation as Vice President) is between him and Modi. We don't have any information on that," Kharge clarified. Notwithstanding Kharge's stance, senior leaders from his party have, since Dhankhar's abrupt departure as VP, have been asserting that there is far more to the episode than meets the eye.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Delhi govt.'s move to amend labour laws will strip lakhs of workers of their rights, say experts
Trade union leaders and experts have criticised the Delhi government's move to amend at least two labour laws as part of its 'Ease of Doing Business' policy, saying the amendments will strip lakhs of workers in the city of several rights. The first pertains to changing the applicability of the Delhi Shops and Establishments Act, 1954, to establishments with 10 or more employees. Currently, the Act, which includes several safeguards for employees, such as leaves, weekly holidays, and a month's notice for dismissal, is applicable even to establishments with one employee. The government is also planning to amend the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which protects workers in cases of lay-offs and closure of units employing 100 or more workers, by raising the minimum threshold of employees to 300. Directions were issued to senior officials at a review meeting on June 30, chaired by Lieutenant-Governor V.K. Saxena and attended by Chief Minister Rekha Gupta, to make these changes, said a source. However, the government is yet to release any official statement on the matter. 'No protection' Anurag Saxena, CITU general secretary (Delhi), said introducing a threshold in the law will leave employees working in smaller establishments without any protection. 'Right now, if a person working at a small bakery or garment shop is fired illegally, he or she can file a complaint under the Act. Once the minimum threshold is increased to 10, workers at thousands of establishments with fewer than 10 employees will be placed outside the ambit of the law and left without any protection,' he said. A senior Delhi government official said once the four Labour Codes, which were passed in Parliament in 2019 and 2020, are implemented, workers in smaller establishments will be provided with 'some level of protection'. However, Mr. Saxena said, 'The labour codes could provide protection to employees in case of wages, but there is no safeguard for workers at a small establishment who are fired illegally.' Concurrent List The government is also looking to make changes to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which applies to commercial units across the country, as labour is part of the Concurrent List, which includes subjects over which the Union and State governments share legislative responsibilities. Currently, the Act provides protection to workers in the event of retrenchment and closure of firms employing 100 workers or more, as prior permission is required from the government or notice is to be given for such actions. The Delhi government plans to amend the Act to cover only establishments employing 300 or more workers. Professor Surajit Mazumdar at the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University, said an employee's rights do not depend on the size of the establishment. 'As things stand, many labour laws meant to protect employees are not enforced properly. And now if you remove the workers from the ambit of the law itself, the workers won't be able to even fight for their rights,' he said. The threshold in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has already been raised to 300 by the Bharatiya Janata Party governments in Gujarat (2021) and Assam (2018). The same change has also been proposed in the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, which is part of the four labour Codes, which have not been implemented amid resistance from labour unions across the country. Mr. Mazumdar said raising the threshold to 300 would be a way of introducing the labour Codes 'through the back door'. Gujarat had also amended the Gujarat Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 2019 (the equivalent of the Delhi Shops and Establishments Act, 1954) six years ago to cover units employing only 10 or more workers. 'The total number of employees in establishments with less than 10 workers in Delhi, who will be affected by the change in law, will be in the range of 7 to 20 lakh and the actual figure will be closer to 15 lakh,' said Mr. Mazumdar. He used the data from the Economic Census, 2013-14 and Delhi Economic Survey 2023-24 to arrive at the conclusion. Brijesh Goyal, chairman of Chamber of Trade & Industry, said the figure will be around 18-20 lakh workers, and Sucheta De, AICCTU national vice president, said the figure will be around 15-17 lakh workers. 'The entire practice is to keep most workers outside the scope of any legal protections,' Ms. De said. When reached out, the CM's office did not offer any comment.
