Lok Sabha Speaker Faces Removal Notice Amid Controversy

On March 9, the Lok Sabha will witness a historic moment as Speaker Om Birla faces a motion for his removal. This unprecedented event arises from allegations of partisanship and misconduct during parliamentary proceedings. With over 118 opposition members backing the notice, Birla will not preside over the session but will defend himself from the Treasury benches. The resolution's discussion is expected to stir significant political debate, as it highlights tensions between the ruling party and opposition leaders. The outcome could set a precedent for future parliamentary conduct and the role of the Speaker. Stay tuned for more updates on this unfolding political drama.

By Narendra Chaudhary Mar 5, 2026, 12:39 IST

Significant Event in Lok Sabha

On March 9, the Lok Sabha will experience an unusual situation as Speaker Om Birla will not oversee the session but will instead sit among the members while a motion for his removal is discussed.

This resolution, expected to be addressed when Parliament enters the second phase of the Budget session on Monday, has been initiated by opposition parties who claim that Birla has acted in a 'blatantly partisan' manner.

P D T Achary, a constitutional expert, clarified that although Birla will not chair the session, he will occupy a prominent seat among the Treasury benches and has the right to defend his actions.

He stated, 'The speaker has a constitutional right to defend himself in the House if the resolution is discussed in the Lok Sabha.' Additionally, Birla will be able to cast his vote against the motion, although he must do so by submitting a slip rather than using the automated voting system.

The notice was filed by at least 118 opposition members, who pointed to Birla's refusal to allow Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and other leaders to speak during the Motion of Thanks to the President's address, as well as his decision to suspend eight MPs.

The notice, presented by Congress member and chief whip K Suresh on behalf of various parties, including the Samajwadi Party and DMK, did not include members from the TMC.

Achary, who previously served as the Lok Sabha secretary general, mentioned that the seating arrangement for the Speaker in such situations is not specified in the Rules. He proposed that a seat typically occupied by a Union minister from the Rajya Sabha could be assigned to Birla, as only Lok Sabha members will participate in the voting process.

According to Article 96 of the Constitution, a Speaker cannot preside over a session while a resolution for their removal is under consideration. The notice must be signed by at least two members, although more can join later.

A Speaker can be removed through a resolution that requires a simple majority, with all members counted for the majority, not just those present and voting, Achary explained.

The notice is submitted to the Lok Sabha secretary general, who reviews it for specific charges at the preliminary stage.

'At the threshold, there is a process of admissibility. Specific charges are necessary for the Speaker to respond,' Achary noted.

The resolution must avoid defamatory language. Typically, the deputy speaker would review the proposed language, but since the current Lok Sabha lacks one, the responsibility may fall to the senior-most member of the panel of chairpersons.

Achary remarked, 'It seems absurd for the Speaker to examine a resolution seeking his removal, but the rules do not address this issue.'

Once the resolution is processed, it will be presented to the House, where it can be discussed after 14 days. The Chair will then ask members in favor to stand; if at least 50 support it, the House will grant permission for discussion, which must conclude within 10 days. Sources from the Lok Sabha indicated that the resolution is likely to be discussed on Monday.

Historical precedents exist, as Speakers G V Mavlankar (1954), Hukam Singh (1966), and Balram Jakhar (1987) faced no-confidence motions, all of which were not adopted due to government majorities. The current resolution accuses Birla of 'acting in a blatantly partisan manner in conducting the business of the House and abusing the constitutional office he occupies,' along with making false allegations against Congress members.