New Delhi: A day after the President turned down an amendment sought retrospectively to the Delhi Members of Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualification) Act, 1997 by the AAP government, the Congress on Tuesday said that it is prepared for the by-polls.
"We have already sought the disqualification of the 21 Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) legislators who were illegally appointed parliamentary secretaries by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal," Maken told IANS.
The office of parliamentary secretary is not exempt from office of profit.
Legal experts say that the disqualification of the 21 Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLAs is almost a foregone conclusion after the President's rejection of the bill that sought to exempt them from office of profit.
"We are prepared for the by-polls. The results of the municipal by-polls have shown that people have started seeing through the false promises made by them," Maken said.
The Delhi Congress chief said that the Kejriwal government had by-passed the due procedure in appointing the parliamentary secretaries.
"Delhi is a union territory and you need to take the Centre's approval before tabling a money bill in the house. Since appointment of parliamentary secretaries entails monetary expenses, any bill related to it is technically a money bill," he said.
"But they did not seek Centre's approval before proposing the amendment to the bill," he added.
Maken said that while appointing parliamentary secretaries, the previous state government had followed "due procedures".
"Firstly, in Sheila Dikshit government, parliamentary secretaries were appointed to assist the chief minister, not the cabinet ministers. All the state government appoint parliamentary secretaries to chief ministers only. But Kejriwal appointed parliamentary secretaries to ministers.
"Secondly, in Delhi, there could be at most two or three parliamentary secretaries. But he appointed as many as 21, which is around one-third of the total strength of the house. Where is this done across India. This is a joke," Maken said.
On the passing of the amendment bill retrospectively, Maken said that although there was "nothing wrong" in passing a bill retrospectively, but "proper procedure" has to be followed for that.