Dehradun, Nov 22 (UNI) The Uttarakhand Assembly was today adjourned four times on the second day of the Winter Session following chaos created by the opposition Congress and Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP).
They trooped into the well of the House and demanded Assembly Speaker Harbans Kapoor to allow immediate discussion on the issues of domicile and caste certificate.
The Congress members also demanded discussion under rule 310 on the issue related to Tripartite Panchayats, Local Units and Gram Panchayat's delimitation.
They alleged that government machineries were being misused for political gains.
Members of the BSP also sought a discussion under rule 310 on the government's decision to increase the land Circle Rate.
BSP member Narain Pal said increase of the Circle Rate had shattered the dreams of the poor to own a house, especially those belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes.
The unrelenting members shouted slogans against the BJP government accusing it of being 'insensitive' towards public issues.
Members of both the opposition parties said the process for obtaining domicile and caste certificates was complicated.
The Speaker first adjourned the House at 1120 hrs till 1145 hrs.
The adjournment was extended from 1145 hrs to 1200 hrs and 1200 hrs to 1210 hrs. When the House reassembled at 1215 hrs, the opposition members again trooped into the well and reiterated their demands.
Within five minutes, the Speaker announced the adjournment of the House till 1500 hrs.
Later, talking to media, Leader of BSP Mohammed Shahzad said the government did not want to discuss the domicile issue inside the House. Referring to Parliamentary Affairs Minister Prakash Pant's statement to the media that the government was willing to discuss the issue under rule 310, he said it was only misguiding the public.
'' The government wants to discuss the matter outside the House not in the house,'' he said, adding that all those residing in Uttarakhand since its inception in November 2000 should be considered domiciles of the state. He maintained that the BSP did not want to disrupt the House proceedings by creating a din but added that as the matter was of a serious nature, it called for a serious discussion.
He disclosed that the matter was earlier discussed under rule 58 in the previous Session but nothing came of it.
'' Hence, we now want the issue to be discussed under rule 310,'' he said.