Fifth - Goa Legislative Assembly

ii) Bill No. 3 of 1980-The Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Reht
\
and Eviction) Control (Fifth Amendment) Bill, 1980 by $hri Luizinho Faleiro;
MLA; was withdrawn with the leave of the House at the consideration stage\-=
of the Bill.
i) Resolution No. 53 by Shri C. U. Chodankar:
"This House strongly. recommends Government to set up an Agricultural
College to impart training and to provide research facilities in modern agricultural
techniques at Navelim, being near to the Salauli Irrigation Project."
The Resolution proposed. Three members took part in the debate. The resolution
was withdrawn with the leave of the House.
ii) Resolution No. 96 by Shri D. F. Desai.
"This House strongly recommends Govt. to take upon the work of laying
the road Telaulii Dialgon-Coldem which was handed over to P.W.D. in 1976
by Telaulim Panchayat."
Speaker gave the following ruling on a letter given by Shri Luizinho
Faleiro, M.L.A. who had tabled identical resolution as that of Resolution No. 96.
"I have received a letter from Hon. Member Shri Luizinho Faleiro requesting
mti to allow him to move Resolution No. 96 standing in the name of Shri Dilkush
Desai in today's list of business as Shri Dilkush Desai is not likely to attend
the Session today and also because he has tabled an identical resolution. The
Hon. Member has requested me to invoke Rule 285.
If the Hon. Member Shri Dilkush Desai had given authority to Shri Faleiro,
Shri Faleiro could have very well moved the Resolution under Rule 106 of the
1Wes of Procedure. Now the point before us is whether in the absence of such
authority Shri Faleiro can move the Resolution, on the ground that he has given
notice of an identical resolution.
Notices of Resolution are tabled under Rule 99 of the Rules of Procedure
and under Rule 115 the relative precedence of the notices of Resolution are
determined by ballot in accordance with the direction of the Speaker.
When identical or substantially similar questions of notices of calling atten-
tions etc. are received from sevwal members we are consolidating such notices
and the names of the members who have given notices are brackated thereto. But
as far as resolutions are concerned, we are not bracketing the names of members
but such notices are given separate numbers and included in the ballot. While
taking the ballot if two identical notices come, the second one is cancelled and
chance is being given to have five resolutions on different subjects. Similarly
when a resolution is moved, identical notices of resolutions are excluded while
taking the subsequuent ballots of the same session.
It is also stated at page 769 of Volume II of Practice of Procedure by Kaul
& Shakdher as under:
"Where two or more members give separate notices of an identical
motion or on the same matter, the names of all such members are bracketed
on the admitted notice, the names of the members iater se being arranged
in'the ordw in which notices are received in point of'time, or in the order
/