'Congress Didn't Give Dates For Discussion': Rijiju Responds To Kharge's Letter To PM Modi On Delimitation

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government had held consultations with parties including the DMK, Samajwadi Party and Shiv Sena (UBT) on the proposed delimitation Constitution Amendment Bill, while the Congress had not provided dates despite repeated requests for discussions.

In an October 19 letter to Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Rijiju rejected the suggestion that the government had failed to consult the Opposition. He said its outreach to other parties followed unsuccessful efforts to arrange formal talks with the Congress.

The government had consulted representatives of the YSRCP, NCP, AIMIM and BJD as well, he said, to facilitate dialogue and build broader support for the legislation.

“I wrote to you on 16th March 2026, 26th March 2026, and 12th April 2026 in this regard,” Rijiju wrote.

He said he had also discussed the matter personally with Kharge and met Lok Sabha Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi during the Monsoon Session to seek cooperation. Despite these approaches, the Congress had not suggested dates for formal discussions, he said.

Rijiju was responding to Kharge’s letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi last week seeking an all-party meeting before the government introduced any Constitutional Amendment Bill on delimitation.

Kharge had warned against proceeding with a “far-reaching” amendment without wider consultations. He said he had first written to Modi on April 11 requesting an all-party meeting on the issue.

Rijiju questioned the repeated demand for consultations, saying the government had already undertaken sustained efforts to engage political parties. He urged the Opposition to cooperate constructively and take account of discussions already held.

The minister also responded to Kharge’s concern over the delay in proroguing Parliament. Kharge had described the delay as “unprecedented”, noting that 64 days had passed since both Houses were adjourned sine die on August 13 without the Monsoon Session being prorogued.

Rijiju said there was no constitutional requirement prescribing a specific timeframe for prorogation. He cited earlier instances in which Houses had remained unprorogued for extended periods, arguing that these had not resulted in constitutional or procedural impropriety.

“These efforts reflect the Government's firm willingness to undertake consultation and constructive parliamentary engagement,” he wrote.

Rijiju said the government remained committed to parliamentary democracy and meaningful dialogue and valued the participation of all political parties in discussions on matters of national importance.

“I also hope that Congress Party will play a constructive role and will not obstruct important future legislations,” he added.