NAGPUR, July 30: The Maharashtra Re-organisation Bill, 1997, initiated by Congress leader and Lok Sabha member, Datta Meghe, will be tabled before Parliament in the on-going monsoon session for discussion and consideration.The unofficial Bill urges the setting up of a separate Vidarbha state, consisting of nine districts of the region Nagpur, Chandrapur, Gadchiroli, Bhandara, Yavatmal, Akola, Buldhana, Wardha and Amravati.The Bill says that the necessary acts be amended for setting up of the new state. ``The existing Maharashtra state should be bifurcated and another state of Vidarbha be set up with Nagpur as its capital,'' the proposed private Bill said.A similar Bill has also been initiated by Bharatiya Janata Party member, Banwarilal Purohit in the Parliament. Both the Bills have been admitted and clubbed in a single issue for discussion.The entire issue has taken a curious turn as Meghe belongs to the Congress and his party has not supported the separate statehood for Vidarbha officially so far. Besides, former Maharashtra chief minister and group leader of Congress in the Lok Sabha, Sharad Pawar, Meghe's mentor, has already opposed such a bifurcation of Maharashtra. On the other hand, though the BJP had adopted a formal resolution on the issue of a separate Vidarbha state in its Bhubaneshwar national council meeting a few years back, the party is now reportedly reluctant to follow it up as its coalition partner in the Maharashtra government, Shiv Sena, is opposing it.However, the proposed Bill may expose both the national parties the Congress and the BJP, if they oppose it in the Parliament during the discussion and consideration. If both the parties support it, the Bill can be pass muster on their own strength in Parliament.Meanwhile, senior lawyer and president of Vidarbha Rajya Sangharsha Samiti, Shrihari Aney, has requested President K R Narayanan to refer the Bill to the state legislature first before placing it to the Parliament for discussion.``This is to be done by the President who is required to specify the period, or the extended period, within which the State may express its views,'' he said in a letter, addressed to the President and pointed out that the Bill should be referred to the Maharashtra legislature due to a Constitutional compulsion.Since the Bill affects the area and boundaries of the existing state of Maharashtra, it is necessary in terms of the provision of Article 3 of the Constitution to refer the Bill to the state legislature so as to enable it to express its views, he said.Although these views are not binding, the procedural requirement of the Constitution must be fulfilled before the Bill is introduced in Parliament. This Bill has the ground-support of the people of nine districts of Vidarbha as also of all political parties, including the BJP, the Congress, Janata Dal, RPI, BSP, Forward Block, Samajwadi Party and others, barring the Shiv Sena. The Bill is, therefore, a reflection of the political thinking of all major parties in these areas, he said.``As central president of the Vidarbha Rajya Sangharsha Samiti, I have to draw your Excellency's attention to the Constitutional pre-requisite of referring this Bill to the state legislature for its views. Otherwise, the Bill would have been brought before the Parliament without complying with the Constitutional requirements. It would be defeated on a point of order, and would not be debated on its merit,'' Aney further pointed out.
