Signing you in

Union minister Kiren Rijiju said on Monday said there was no impropriety or irregularity in Parliament not being prorogued since the monsoon session ended in August as there was “no constitutional requirement” prescribing a specific period within which a House must be prorogued following its adjournment sine die.

**EDS: SCREENGRAB VIA PTI VIDEOS** New Delhi: Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju addresses the media regarding the INDIA bloc's protest demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar's resignation, in New Delhi, Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2026. (PTI Photo)(PTI10_06_2026_000320B) (PTI)In a letter to Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge, the minister also said that he had reached out to the Congress unsuccessfully and added that consultations were held with a number of other opposition parties, including the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and Samajwadi Party.

This came in the wake of Kharge writing to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, complaining that the House was not prorogued even 64 days after being adjourned sine die on August 13.

Also read: Modi imposing ‘undeclared Emergency’, says Kharge; Opposition to meet CJI tomorrow

In the letter, dated October 16, Kharge also demanded an all-party meeting regarding the government’s new delimitation proposals, and warned against rushing a Constitutional Amendment Bill (One Hundred and Thirty First Amendment Bill, 2026) without consultation. The government is pushing for the passage of the bill along with the delimitation bill to roll out 33% reservation for women in Lok Sabha and state assemblies, as well as expand the Lok Sabha.

Responding to Kharge’s letter, Rijiju said the mere fact that a House was not prorogued during such an interval did not, by itself, give rise to any constitutional or procedural impropriety or irregularity.

Also read: Shashi Tharoor rejects ‘regime change’ charge as anti-EC protests continue

“There have been innumerable instances in the past in which both Houses remained unprorogued for long periods, extending up to 87 days. In 2008, the Lok Sabha sat for two days, on 21st and 22nd July, for the confidence motion; the House was then kept unprorogued, reconvened on 17 October 2008, and was adjourned on 24 October to meet again on 10 December,” he wrote in his reply to Kharge.

The minister said there were similar instances in 1987 (76 days); 1989 (54 days); 2006 (49 days); 2013 (49 days) and 1963 (41 days) when the house was prorogued much after the adjournment.

The minister also denied the allegations that the government overlooked the Opposition or moved away from building consensus on critical issues.

“The government has consistently sought the Opposition’s support and cooperation for the consideration and passage of the delimitation amendment bill. The government has reached out to the Congress party being the principal opposition party on several occasions. I wrote to you on 16 March 2026, 26 March 2026 and 12 April 2026 in this regard. Besides these written communications, I had also discussed the matter with you personally and sought your support and cooperation,” Rijiju said.

The minister cited his meeting with the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi during the monsoon session to seek his cooperation.

Also read: Modi govt eyeing Constitutional amendments as monsoon session nears: The math, politics and fears — decoded

“...However, after repeated requests the Congress party didn’t give dates for discussion after which the government’s outreach had extended to other political parties. Consultations were held with representatives of parties including the DMK, SP. YSRCP, NCP. Shiv Sena (UBT), AlMIM and BJD with a view to facilitating dialogue and building a broader consensus in support of the proposed legislation,” he said.

Claiming that the government already made sustained efforts for dialogue; the minister put the ball in the Opposition’s court, pointing out that it was now incumbent on them to cooperate.

“These efforts reflect the government’s firm willingness to undertake consultation and constructive parliamentary engagement. I reiterate that the government remains committed to the basic principles of parliamentary democracy and to facilitating meaningful dialogue through the effective functioning of Parliament,” he said.

In April after the constitutional amendment bill did not gather the necessary two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha, Modi compared the Opposition’s vote against the bill to “female foeticide”. He said the four main opposition parties- the Congress, the Samajwadi Party, the Trinamool Congress and the DMK- will face the consequences.

Even as several opposition parties continue to oppose the proposed delimitation, the government has been reaching out to parties such as the DMK and SP. There is speculation that since the House was not prorogued, the government could call a special session and try to pass the bills afresh.

Smriti covers an intersection of politics and governance. Having spent over a decade in journalism, she combines old fashioned leg work with modern story telling tools.