Jharkhand ruling alliance members submit memo to Governor’s guard on 3 bills

The State Coordination Committee members said the Raj Bhavan has not mentioned the specific objections in the Bills, violating Article 200 of the Constitution.
Jharkhand Governor CP Radhakrishnan
Jharkhand Governor CP Radhakrishnan

RANCHI:  After failing to get an appointment with Jharkhand Governor CP Radhakrishnan, members of the State Coordination Committee (SCC) on Sunday reached Raj Bhavan and handed over a memorandum to the security guard at the gate seeking Governor’s stand over three bills that have been returned to the state government.

The SCC panel is formed by three ruling allies – the JMM, Congress and the RJD — to enable the parties 
to maintain coordination. The SCC members said the Raj Bhavan has not mentioned the specific objections in the Bills, violating Article 200 of the Constitution.

The SCC members also alleged that despite the fact that they had written to the Raj Bhavan on September 1 seeking time for September 3, but neither the time was received nor was any information given. 
“It is clear the Raj Bhavan and the Governor are working under pressure of a particular party or a particular person,” they said. 

JMM general secretary Vinod Kumar Pandey accused the Governor of violating Article 200 of the Constitution, suggesting that the Governor is working at the behest of a specific party. “It appears the Governor does not want local and reservation policies to be formulated,” said Panday. They want the Governor to clear his stand on the three bills passed by the state Assembly, he added.

State Congress chief Rajesh Thakur said this is for the first time that the leaders of the ruling alliance are not given time by the Raj Bhawan. “However, opposition leaders freely enter the Governor’s house and set their agenda,” said Thakur.

The then Governor Ramesh Bais in March 2022 had returned the anti-lynching bill to the state government with two specific suggestions, including reconsidering the definition of ‘mob’ which was “not in consonance with the well-defined legal lexicon or glossary”.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com