NEW DELHI: The Opposition’s no-confidence motion against Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, submitted by Congress and backed by 118 MPs, has hit a procedural snag even before it can be formally tabled. ANI sources highlighted the specific technical shortcomings in the notice that could have led to its outright rejection under Lok Sabha rules.However, despite the shortcomings, the Speaker has asked the Lok Sabha Secretariat to get the ‘faulty’ notice to remove him “rectified” to prevent its rejection.
News agency ANI, citing its sources, revealed that the notice repeatedly referenced events from February 2025 and had the incidents mentioned a full four times. The notice should have had the incidents from the ongoing Budget Session cited accurately.This clerical error pertaining to dates is a serious procedural lapses Lok Sabha rules mandate precision in such submissions; any ambiguity or factual inaccuracy in the notice can provide grounds for the Speaker to dismiss it summarily without further consideration.Speaker Om Birla, however, has refrained from rejecting the motion outright based on these shortcomings and instead issued clear instructions to the Secretariat to facilitate corrections and advance the process “expeditiously” as per established parliamentary norms.On what ANI sources describe as principled “moral grounds,” Birla has voluntarily decided to recuse himself from presiding over Lok Sabha proceedings until the no-confidence motion against him is fully resolved, a move that underscores his intent to maintain the House’s impartiality during this sensitive period.The revised notice, once submitted, will undergo prompt examination in accordance with the rules and is slated for listing after the second phase of the Budget Session commences — with discussions likely kicking off on March 9, the very first day of that part, according to Lok Sabha Secretariat insiders.
Why was the no-confidence motion submitted?
The Congress-led Opposition, excluding the TMC, levelled serious charges of “blatantly partisan” conduct against Speaker Birla, accusing him of systematically stifling their voices in the House and filed the motion citing four specific, high-profile incidents from the recent Budget Session.They pointed to the denial of permission for Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi to speak on February 2 during the crucial Motion of Thanks debate on the President’s Address, particularly when he sought to reference former Army chief General MM Naravane’s revelations about the 2020 India-China border aggression in Ladakh — a moment the Opposition views as a deliberate muzzling of critical national security discourse.Birla’s public observation, made a day after Prime Minister Narendra Modi skipped his scheduled reply to the Motion of Thanks, deemed a group of Congress women MPs as “posing a threat” to the PM and could precipitate an “unprecedented incident.” This was remarked as biased and inflammatory by the opposition.Also, the suspension of eight Opposition MPs, the opposition argues, was disproportionately harsh and reflective of the Speaker’s one-sided enforcement of House discipline.The opposition also claimed the Speaker had selective tolerance, citing Birla’s alleged inaction against BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, who reportedly unleashed “wholly objectionable and personalised attacks” targeting two former Prime Ministers, despite repeated demands from Opposition benches for reprimand or further action.
