Lekhi denies approving Parl Question

New Delhi: A political row broke out after Minister of State for External Affairs Meenakshi Lekhi said she had not approved a question tabled in the Lok Sabha on Friday on declaring Hamas a terrorist organisation, prompting the government to issue a clarification that it was a “procedural error”.

As Opposition parties latched onto Lekhi’s remarks and described the incident as a “serious breach and violation of rules”, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) issued a statement, saying the unstarred question “needs a technical correction in terms of reflecting Shri V Muraleedharan as the Minister of State replying to the Parliament Question”. “This is being suitably undertaken,” the ministry added.

“You have been misinformed as I have not signed any paper with this question and this answer,” Lekhi said in response to a post on X on the issue.

The unstarred question number 980, titled “Declaration of Hamas as Terrorist Organisation”, was put by Congress MP Kumbakudi Sudhakaran.

“I have reported this breach to the PMO and (External Affairs Minister) S Jaishankar and made a phone call to the foreign secretary, and told them to investigate. Action should be taken against those who have done this,” Lekhi told a press conference.

“We have noted that Lok Sabha unstarred question number 980 answered on December 8 needs a technical correction in them, the court ordered it to approach them through the collector.

When the company’s lawyer complained about delay in hearing of regular bail plea of its CEO and managing director Jaysukh Patel and urged it to consider his “plight,” the court said the word “plight” should remain for those who have suffered because of its role, which has been made clear in the special investigation team report. “After going through the SIT report, can you argue what you are arguing? It was your act, you were the company, you ...replaced wooden plank with aluminium...After SIT report, you are not allowed to speak at all. You cannot argue you are the sufferer, you cannot place your problems before us,” the court said.

The government informed the court about the condition of 1,900 major bridges in the state, of which 384 are in municipal corporation areas and 113 are in municipalities.

The Chief Justice suggested that old bridges with heritage value should be repaired with the help of conservation architects.

Giving a contract to repair an old bridge to someone incompetent could result in a Morbi-like disaster, the court pointed out.