As the opposition moves a formal resolution to oust Speaker Om Birla, the Indian Parliament revisited a rare constitutional situation. Birla faces accusations of “partisan conduct” and “stifling the opposition,” but history shows he is not the first presiding officer to encounter such a challenge. From the first Speaker, G.V. Mavalankar, to today, the “Removal Motion” has served as a tool of parliamentary protest. Here’s a look at the history, the law, and the famous words of Jawaharlal Nehru.
What is a removal motion?
Unlike a general “No-Confidence Motion” aimed at toppling a government, the process to remove a Speaker is specifically governed by Article 94(c) of the Indian Constitution.
The rule: The Speaker can be removed by a resolution passed by a majority of “all the then members” of the House (the Effective Majority).
The notice: A mandatory 14-day notice must be given before the resolution can be moved.
The significance: It is one of the most serious motions in Parliament, as it challenges the neutrality of the highest office in the Lok Sabha.
1954: The first challenge to G.V. Mavalankar
The first removal motion in independent India was filed against the “Father of the Lok Sabha,” G.V. Mavalankar, in 1954.
Who moved it? Socialist leader Vigneshwar Misir and 21 other MPs.
The allegation: Much like today, the opposition then claimed that the Speaker was not impartial and favored the ruling Congress party.
The outcome: After a two-hour debate, the motion was overwhelmingly defeated.
‘A question of dignity’: What Nehru said?
During the 1954 debate, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru intervened. He argued that the office of the Speaker represents the dignity and freedom of the House. “We do not wish to take too much time, but I would submit that more time should be allowed to the Opposition than to the Government Benches,” Nehru said, urging the House to listen to the grievances.
However, Nehru also warned that challenging the Speaker should not be taken lightly. He stated that the motion wasn’t just about a person but about the “high dignity of the House” itself. He insisted that no “whips” be issued, allowing members to vote according to their conscience regarding the chair’s integrity.
Other Speakers who faced the motion
Throughout the history of the Indian Parliament, the removal of a Speaker remains an exceedingly rare event, with only three previous instances where such a formal challenge was brought to the floor. The first occurred in 1954 against the inaugural Speaker, G.V. Mavalankar, after the opposition alleged a lack of impartiality; however, following a historic debate where Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru defended the dignity of the Chair, the motion was overwhelmingly rejected.
Subsequent attempts followed a similar pattern of being defeated by the ruling majority. In 1966, a resolution against Speaker Sardar Hukam Singh failed to move forward after it could not secure the mandatory support of 50 members required for initiation. Similarly, in 1987, a motion against Balram Jakhar was negated by the House. Now, in 2026, Om Birla becomes the fourth Speaker to face such a notice. To date, no removal motion has ever been successfully passed in India’s legislative history, as the government of the day has consistently maintained the “effective majority” required to protect the sanctity of the office.
Why history favours the Speaker
In every historical case, the ruling government has strongly supported the Speaker. Because a speaker is usually elected from the majority party, a removal motion serves as a “mini” test of government strength. Unless the treasury benches or their allies defect, the “Effective Majority” required by Article 94(c) remains a significant obstacle for the opposition to overcome.
ALSO READ | Why Om Birla won’t preside over Lok Sabha until part 2 of Budget Session
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: ZEE News
