Skip to content
Indian Liberals
Filter:

Tip: search runs across all languages; results are tokenised per-page using the document's lang attribute. Search inside the documents →

letter

[Letter to N Dandekar]

Bombay · 1965

3 pages

Summary

In this letter dated July 26, 1965, A. P. Jain writes to N. Dandekar about the Lok Sabha Secretariat’s decision not to accept advance notices of adjournment motions, urgent public-importance motions, or a no-confidence motion before the session’s business list is circulated. Jain explains that the first day’s business is expected to be circulated only shortly before the session begins, and asks Dandekar to sign and return an enclosed letter, also obtain Minoo Masani’s signature, so that the proposed motion can be submitted promptly.

Jain recalls that the PSP had moved a no-confidence motion during the previous session concerning Pakistan’s aggression in the Rann of Kutch, which the group opposed because it had been presented without prior consultation. He proposes coordinating with opposition leaders to secure the minimum 50 votes required under the Rules. The letter also notes that the Jan Sangh, PSP, Socialist, and independent groups led by Prakash Vir Shastri have decided to table a separate no-confidence motion on the Kutch agreement, making opposition coordination difficult and prompting Jain to urge careful procedural strategy.

Key points

  • The Lok Sabha Secretariat has disallowed advance notice of certain motions before the day’s business list is circulated.
  • Jain asks Dandekar to arrange signatures from himself and Minoo Masani on a proposed letter.
  • The proposed no-confidence motion concerns the Kutch agreement and Pakistan’s aggression in the Rann of Kutch.
  • Jain states that at least 50 votes are required for admitting a no-confidence motion under the Rules.
  • He recommends contacting all opposition leaders and possibly holding a meeting before the next session.
  • Jain distinguishes his party’s position from other opposition groups that have chosen to table a separate motion.

Metadata and summary are AI-extracted from the source PDF and reviewed for editorial accuracy. The original work is available via the Read PDF tab above (where present); paragraph-level citation inside the PDF is deferred to a future engagement.

Related across the archive