THE RAJYA SABHA
Parking on the streets of New Delhi.
These three examples testify to
the fact that the Rajya Sabha need not only take a well-trodden path in deciding the fate of legislation. They also prove the point that the Council can exercise its authority and power in applying its mind to assess the merits of legislation and accordingly chart out a course of action.
Pursuing issues of national interest The debates of the Rajya Sabha in the three cases show how the Council followed its own course independent of the course followed by the other House in exercising its law-making power.
The Trade Marks Bill was
introduced in the Lok Sabha in April 1993. Thereafter it was referred to the Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Industry. The committee reported in April 1994 recommending alterations to certain sections. The government accepted the alterations and incorporated them in the Bill which was later taken up in the Lok Sabha for consideration and passage. The House passed it on 29 May 1995. The then Minister of Industry, Shri K.Karunakaran, moved the Bill in the Rajya Sabha on 31 July 1995. When the Bill was discussed
threadbare in the Rajya Sabha, several 60 | The Parliamentarian | 2013: Issue One
Members supported referring the Bill to a select committee. They were of the opinion that certain provisions might harm Indian entrepreneurs. The then Member of the House Shri S. Jaipal Reddy expressed his apprehension that the Bill would open the Indian market to all kinds of services from foreign countries and, therefore, wanted his apprehensions allayed by referring it to a select committee where issues could be discussed in detail and greater depth. He even went to the extent of saying that the Lok Sabha passed it because the Government had a majority there and not because the Members of the Lok Sabha were happy with it.
“After all, through your majority
you rule,” he said. “Though we are in a majority here, we do not want to overrule any Bill indiscriminately. Let me tell you very clearly: we merely want the government to take us into confidence. That is all. We will articulate our fears. Let the officers concerned, competent technocrats, come and tell the Members of Parliament in the select committee that their fears are misplaced.” Similarly, Shri
I.K.Gujral urged the
Minister to accept the proposal to refer the Bill to a select committee. “He would be richer by having the
opinion of the committee because he would then be in a position to
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92