Governor of Punjab calls a two-day assembly meeting beginning on November 28

In a statement released on Wednesday, Punjab Governor Banwarilal Purohit called for a two-day state assembly session to begin on November 28.
The governor called the 16th Punjab Vidhan Sabha’s fifth session at 2:00 PM on November 28, according to a statement released by the secretariat of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha.

On Monday, the Punjab Cabinet gave its approval to suggest to the governor that the Vidhan Sabha hold a two-day winter session starting on November 28.

Three money bills—the Punjab Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2023, the Punjab Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (Amendment) Bill, 2023, and the Indian Stamp (Punjab Amendment) Bill, 2023—will be tabled in the next session.

On November 15, Banwarilal Purohit adjourned the budget session upon receiving a request in writing from the administration of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha.
A cause of contention between the Raj Bhavan and the Bhagwant Mann administration has been the extension of the budget session called by the AAP government.

The March-called Budget session was postponed sine die, or for an undetermined amount of time, rather than being prorogued, which would have ended the house’s session.

The budget session was then extended by the state government, which called a special session for June 19 and 20.

Four laws were passed during the session: the Punjab Universities Laws Amendment Bill (2023), the Punjab Police Amendment Bill (2023), the Punjab Sikh Gurdwaras Amendment Bill (2023), and the Punjab Affiliated Colleges (Security of Service) Amendment Bill (2023).

Also read: Tragic Loss: 2 Army Officers, 2 Soldiers Martyred in Battle Against Terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir

Having labeled the June session “patently illegal,” the governor has not yet agreed to any of the four Bills. On October 20–21, the state government once more summoned a two-day meeting to continue discussing the budget. At that point, Banwarilal Purohit had declared that the meeting was “bound to be illegal” and that any business done there would be “unlawful.” Later, the state administration filed a case in the Supreme Court against the governor.