BJP’s technical blow to Special Status Bill

KVP Bill only sought an amendment to the Act to ensure AP gets the Status

“The cat is out of the bag” shouted one of the Congress MPs in the Upper House on Tuesday afternoon after the Leader of the House, Arun Jaitley, termed the Private Member's Bill introduced by Dr K V P Ramachandra Rao, in the Rajya Sabha, a Money Bill.

The Congress MP who introduced the Bill thought he was only introducing a Private Member's Bill in the Rajya Sabha during the last session, seeking amendments to the AP Reorganization Act to effect changes to it, leading to grant of Special Category Status to AP and funds for the development of Backward Areas of Rayalaseema and North Coastal Andhra and for the construction of the new Capital.

A Private Member's Bill is the property of the said member and only he could decide on its fate. Hence, when he presses for division (voting) it has to follow. The novel method to skirt a discussion and voting on the Private Member's Bill in the RS was adopted by the ruling BJP members to deny AP its justified Special Status. In doing so it not only strangulated the AP sentiment, but also trampled on the right of the Member to introduce and seek a voting on the Private Member Bill.

The BJP used AAP member Bhagwant Mann's issue of filming the Parliament and uploading the same on social media, to scuttle the procedure to take up the voting on the Bill. Today, after a second consecutive day of Congress stalling the RS proceedings over the same, it ducked the issue on the plea that the Private Member's Bill is in fact not one such but a Money Bill and hence the Rajya Sabha has no role in it and it was only the Lok Sabha that is Constitutionally allowed to discuss the same.

A Money Bill is the property of the government and Rajya Sabha cannot see one being introduced in it and cannot take it up on its own. This plea was based on the premise that the Bill sought to introduce a financial angle to an existing Act as the Special Category Status meant financial involvement in several forms. However, why and how the BJP preferred to do so now after allowing the Bill to crop into the RS business at all is there for all to see. It was plain politics. The BJP did not expect the member to press for a division as the very AP Reorganization Act, 2014 of was drawn by the very Congress party whose member was introducing the Bill.

Despite its insistence on the Special Category Status during the debate on bifurcation of 10 years, the leadership of the BJP has been in no mood to sanction the Status to AP. After dilly dallying over the issue for nearly two years seeking shelter behind the provisions of the 14th Finance Commission, the BJP kept insisting that the Status could not be bestowed on AP on technical grounds. Ramachandra Rao's Bill only sought an amendment to the Act to ensure that AP gets the Status as assured in the Reorganization Act. Today the BJP took shelter behind the Money Bill argument citing the Rules.

Under Article 110(1) of the Constitution, a Bill is deemed to be a Money Bill if it contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the following matters:
(a) the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax;
(b) regulation of borrowing by the government;
(c) custody of the Consolidated Fund or Contingency Fund of India, and payments into or withdrawals from these Funds;
(d) appropriation of moneys out of the Consolidated Fund of India;
(e) declaring of any expenditure to be expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India or the increasing of the amount of any such expenditure;
(f) receipt of money on account of the Consolidated Fund of India or the public account of India or the custody or issue of such money or the audit of the accounts of the Union or of a State; or
(g) any matter incidental to any of the matters specified in sub-clauses (a) to (f).

But a Bill shall not be deemed to be a Money Bill by reason only that it provides for the imposition of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment of fees for licences or fees for services rendered, or by reason that it provides for the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax by any local authority or body for local purposes.

Article 110 (3) lays down that “if any question arises whether a Bill is a Money Bill or not, the decision of the Speaker of the House of the People thereon shall be final”. This means that once the Speaker has certified a Bill as a Money Bill, its nature cannot be questioned in a court of law, in the Houses of Parliament, or even by the President.

Today's argument of the BJP was precisely this - that the Private Member's Bill contains one or several of the above Rules and hence it was for the Speaker of Lok Sabha to decide on its nomenclature and fate. Under Article 109 (1), a Money Bill cannot be introduced in Rajya Sabha. Once passed by Lok Sabha, it is sent to Rajya Sabha along with the Speaker’s certificate that it is a Money Bill for its recommendations.

However, Rajya Sabha can neither reject nor amend the Bill, and must return it within 14 days, after which Lok Sabha may choose to accept or reject all or any of its recommendations. In either case, the Bill is deemed to have been passed by both Houses. Under Article 109(5), if Rajya Sabha fails to return the Bill to Lok Sabha within 14 days, it is deemed to have been passed anyway.

The procedure to pass a Money Bill in Parliament is a key provision limiting the powers of Rajya Sabha compared to Lok Sabha. Any Bill other than a Money Bill cannot become law unless both Houses agree to it with or without amendments. This is important in the current context of questions being raised over classifying a Bill as a Money Bill allegedly to bypass Rajya Sabha, where the government does not have a majority.

Again any Bill that relates to revenue or expenditure is a Financial Bill. A Money Bill is a specific kind of Financial Bill, defined very precisely: a Bill is deemed to be a Money Bill if it deals only with matters specified in Article 110 (1) (a) to (g). A Money Bill is certified by the Speaker as such in other words, only those Financial Bills that carry the Speaker’s certification are Money Bills.

Financial Bills that are not certified by the Speaker are of two kinds: Bills that contain any of the matters specified in Article 110, but do not contain only those matters [Article 117 (1)]; and ordinary Bills that contain provisions involving expenditure from the Consolidated Fund [Article 117 (3)].

A Bill of the first kind, like a Money Bill, can be introduced only in Lok Sabha, and only with the recommendation of the President. But other restrictions that apply to Money Bills do not apply to these Bills. Bills under Article 117 (3) can be introduced in either House, though the President’s recommendation is essential for their consideration, and therefore, passage.

This is where it got stuck today. Anyway the House could not allow a discussion or a division today as there was no motion introduced, the deputy chairman said. Moreover, it could be taken up the next Friday if everyone agreed, he said. The Opposition including the CPI (M) insisted on knowing whether the chair could assure the House of a certain debate and voting on the KVP Bill the next Friday.

The chair could not do so saying it would abide by the Rules. Hence the Rajya Sabha cannot discuss the Bill at all. If any, it is the Lok Sabha where the BJP is in majority that could discuss it. And it is for the Speaker to decide what type of a Bill it is. In the maze of this technicality, the move to press for the Special Status is lost again. The Congress sought to play the political game and the BJP-TDP combine changed the Rules!

By W Chandrakanth