546 Practice and Procedure of Parliament

CHAPTER XX

Calling Attention to Matters of

Urgent Public Importance
A member may, with the prior permission of the Speaker, call the attention of
a Minister to any matter of urgent public importance and the Minister may make a
brief statement or ask for time to make a statement later1.

Mode of Giving Notice

A notice to call the attention of a Minister must be addressed by a member to
the Secretary-General, and according to the practice, which is now well established,
a copy thereof is endorsed separately to the Speaker and the Minister concerned2. The
purpose of endorsing copy of the notice to the Minister is to give the Minister
advance intimation and also to enable the Minister to apprise the Speaker, if necessary,
of the facts of the matter raised therein in order to assist him in deciding the admissibility
of the notice. The notice addressed to the Secretary-General and copies thereof endorsed
to the Speaker and the Minister concerned are received in the Parliamentary Notice
Office. The copy intended for the Minister is collected by the Ministry concerned
themselves from the Lok Sabha Secretariat. Before the commencement of a session,
the notices can, at the earliest, be given only with effect from a day (which is usually
the third working day of the Secretariat before the date of commencement of the
session) fixed in advance and notified in the Bulletin. The Speaker considers these
notices only few days in advance of the commencement of the Session. Notices
received in advance of the date notified in the Bulletin for receipt of notices are
returned to the members concerned. However, after the commencement of the Session,
the notice has to be given by 1000 hours on the day on which the matter is proposed
to be raised in the House. A notice received after that hour is treated as notice given

1. Rule 197.
This rule was embodied in the Rules of Procedure on 1 January 1954. Prior to this, there was
considerable feeling that no precise procedure was available to a private member to raise an
important matter at a short notice. The procedure of adjournment motion was frequently used for
such purposes. Since an adjournment motion being in the nature of a censure motion and its scope
considerably restricted, its use for other purposes was deprecated. See also Chapter XXI—Motion
for Adjournment on Matters of Urgent Public Importance.
The concept of ‘Calling Attention Notices’ is of Indian origin. It is an innovation in the modern
parliamentary procedure and combines the asking of a question for answer with supplementaries
and short comments in which all points of view are expressed precisely and the Government has
adequate opportunity to state its case. Sometimes it gives opportunity to members to criticize the
Government directly or indirectly, and to bring to the surface the failure or inadequate action of
Government on an important matter.
2. During the years 1971, 1975 and 1976, when the Proclamation of Emergency was in operation,
the House had for certain periods, dispensed with the calling attention matters in view of the
urgency and importance of Government business—see L.S. Deb., 4-12-1971, cc. 163-64;
21-7-1975, cc. 26-72; 25-10-1976, cc. 24-47.
 Calling Attention to Matters of Urgent Public Importance 547

for the next sitting3. When notices from more than five members are received on the
subject selected by the Speaker for admission, a ballot is held to determine the
relative priority of each such notice. Where the number of members giving notice on
a subject selected by the Speaker is five or less, their inter se priority is determined
with reference to the date and time of receipt of the notices4.
All notices received during a week, commencing from the first sitting of the
House till 10.00 hours of the last day of the week, on which the House is to sit, are
valid for that week. It is not necessary that notices given for a particular day may be
considered for that day only. These may be considered for any day during the period
of their validity or thereafter also, depending upon the importance of the subject
involved. Notices which are not taken up during the week for which they have been
tabled are deemed to have lapsed at 10.00 hours on the last working day of the week
unless the Speaker has admitted any of them for a subsequent sitting or has kept the
same pending till receipt of facts from the Minister concerned.
After the Speaker has selected a subject, members who have tabled notices
thereon are verbally informed. The Minister concerned is also informed verbally
through the principal officers followed by a written communication. Where no
information is communicated to a member, it has to be presumed that notice has not
been selected by the Speaker.
A member cannot give more than two notices for any one sitting. Notice on the
same subject can be given by more than one member, but names of not more than five
members, as determined by ballot, are shown in the List of Business5. Where a notice
is signed by more than one member, it is deemed to have been given by the first
signatory only.
Conditions of Admissibility
Urgency and public importance are the main tests of admissibility of a calling
attention notice6. The admissibility of such a notice is decided by the Speaker7.

3. Rule 197(2)(ii) and Dir. 113B.

4. Rule 197(2)(iv).
5. Rule 197(1) and (2). This Rule was amended on 23 June 1967. Previously, neither was there any
limit to the number of notices that a member might table nor to the number of members who might
table notices on the same subject.
Though no limits had been imposed under the Rules, the Speaker discouraged the practice of
giving a number of notices by the same member and observed that a member might not give more
than two notices for a particular sitting—see L.S. Deb., 23-8-1965, cc. 1236-38; Bn. (II),
23-8-1965, para 1380.
6. Rule 197 (1).
7. Ibid., L.S. Deb., 19-8-1965, c. 993.
The Speaker has firmly declined to give reasons for disallowance of the notices or to enter into
arguments in that regard with the members in the House—see L.S. Deb., 5-8-1959, cc. 661-62;
17-2-1961, c. 611; 21-2-1961, cc. 1100-01.
It is, however, open to the members to meet the Speaker in his Chamber and place before him
their points of view. The Speaker may review his orders on good and sufficient grounds—see L.S.
Deb., 3-5-1962, cc. 2457-68; 11-11-1965, cc. 1346-50; 1-9-1966, c. 8466.
548 Practice and Procedure of Parliament

The Speaker’s power to allow or disallow a notice is unlimited8. The decision

of the Speaker is final and members cannot raise question of admissibility of calling
attention notices in the House9.
The Speaker may decide to admit a calling attention notice in place of an
adjournment motion on the same subject10. A calling attention notice usually renders
a notice of an adjournment motion infructuous and unnecessary11.
Before deciding the admissibility of a notice, the Speaker may call for facts and
comments from the Minister concerned, because a notice is inadmissible if it lacks
factual basis12. Where necessary, the Minister is also asked to furnish information on
specific points such as the responsibility of the Union Government, its nature, extent,
etc.13. A notice after admission may be taken up the same day provided a calling
attention notice has not already been fixed for the day in the List of Business. In that
case, depending upon the urgency of the matter, the Speaker may allow another notice
to be taken up later at an hour fixed by him which is generally at the end of the day14.
A calling attention notice may be disallowed even though such a notice on the
same subject has been admitted in the other House and the Minister concerned has
made a statement in reply15. It is not necessary that if a notice has been admitted in

8. The Speaker is not bound by any precedents strictly, although he has laid down for himself such
obvious rules or conventions, as for example, whether the matter falls within the cognizance of
a Minister of the Union Government, whether the matter is trifling, involves argument or is vague
or general or whether it can be appropriately dealt with by other parliamentary procedures. Admission
of a notice is not a precedent, for a similar matter in another context may be disallowed. It is the
feeling, the judgement of the Speaker, and the surrounding circumstances in the context of the
information available to him on the day the notice is received, that are vital in determining
whether a notice is admissible or not. At times it so happens that a matter, at its initial stage, may
not appear to be that important and urgent, so no significance is attached to it. But, on a later date,
the matter may, due to subsequent developments, assume significance and, consequently the
Speaker may admit it then. The Speaker admits or selects a notice purely on the importance and
the urgency of the matter raised therein. Although sometimes he judges the importance of a matter
by the number of members who are interested in it or by the national interest behind it, these are
factors like others which he takes into consideration; by themselves they are not conclusive.
9. L.S. Deb., 18-11-1962, c. 308; 22-11-1985, cc. 293-94; 12-8-1986, c. 560.
10. L.S. Deb., 1-5-1962, cc. 1797-98.
11. Ibid., 3-5-1966, c. 14519; 7-8-1970, c. 202.
12. Ibid., 11-4-1960, c. 10904.
13. The facts, to be placed by the Minister before the Speaker, have to reach the Speaker within
24 hours of the reference failing which the admissibility of the notices may be decided by the
Speaker independently of the facts called for.
14. See L.S. Deb., 17-12-1963, cc. 5162-66 and 5884-95; 24-11-1965, cc. 3605-12 and 3722-26. It
is, however, now a settled practice that a calling attention notice is admitted at least one day in
advance and an entry about it is made in the printed List of Business. There have been instances
when more than one calling attention notice was admitted on the same day. L.S. Deb., 19-11-1963,
cc. 380-94 and 531-36; 27-11-1963, cc. 1703-11 and 1711-20; 17-12-1963, cc. 5162-66, and
5284-94; 17-5-1966, cc. 17289-98 and 17441-57; 4-8-1978, cc. 285-310 and 408-36; 20-2-1977,
cc. 330-38; 15-5-1979, cc. 266-89 and 396-416; 16-5-1979, cc. 247-50, 387-401 and 402-16;
21-3-1980, cc. 244-63 and 380-92; 10-5-1983, cc. 316-29 and 405-17; 8-5-1984, cc. 319-37 and
446-68, 27-11-2007, cc. 477-507.
15. L.S. Deb., 24-8-1965, c. 1421.
 Calling Attention to Matters of Urgent Public Importance 549

one House, an identical or similar notice should also be admitted in the other House,
as the Presiding Officer of each House takes decisions independently16.
As a rule, a notice must be given on the same day on which a matter has arisen
or become publicly known. If it is given a little later, the notice may be rejected on
the ground that it has not been raised at the earliest opportunity17.
Only those matters which are primarily the concern of the Union Government
can be raised through a calling attention notice18. There have, however, been instances

16. Ibid., 1-3-1966, cc. 5042-43; 17-11-1966, c. 3787-88.

17. The members’ chief source of information for tabling calling attention notices is the daily newspaper.
Sometimes the notice may be based on information communicated to a member in writing by his
constituents, but such notices are few in number.
A notice based on newspaper reports about which it was represented to the Speaker that they
were not correct was allowed in view of a statement on the subject made by the Minister in the
other House—L.S. Deb., 12-3-1970, cc. 221-31; 13-3-1970, c. 225.
18. (a) Notices regarding the following matters have generally been admitted by the Speaker—
(i) Incidents which involve a question of national security and unity of the country;
(ii) Serious food, drought or flood situation in the country or any part thereof;
(iii) Issues involving maintenance of essential services;
(iv) Incidents involving a matter of law and order in a Union territory over which the members
and the public are greatly agitated;
(v) Serious developments in States or Union territories involving proper functioning of the
constitutional machinery;
(vi) Serious issues involving production of important commodities like oil, fertilizers, textiles,
sugar, etc.;
(vii) Issues involving action on the part of a foreign Government which would adversely affect
the interests of India;
(viii) Border incidents with a neighbouring country which are of a serious nature or where loss
of life is involved;
(ix) Matters involving important issues pertaining to relations between the Union Government
and the State Governments;
(x) Serious incidents in foreign countries involving Indian diplomats or Indian nationals.
(b) Matters mentioned in the above list are not exhaustive and the Speaker can, in his discretion,
admit a notice to call attention on any matter not covered by the above mentioned categories,
keeping in view the urgency and public importance of the matter. Calling attention notices on the
following matters are usually not admitted—
(i) Law and order matters in States [A calling attention notice relating to a matter of law and
order in a State having been disallowed, the Minister was asked to make a factual statement
after collecting the information from the State Government, on the understanding that the
members who had tabled the notice would not be allowed to ask questions on the statement—
L.S. Deb., 18-4-1966, cc. 11395-96; 20-4-1966, cc. 11985-86];
(ii) Strikes, lock-outs, fasts and agitations;
(iii) Terms and conditions of service of employees;
(iv) Accidents;
(v) Matters likely to be debated in the near future or discussion on which has already been
fixed;
(vi) Matters which do not involve the primary responsibility of the Union Government;
550 Practice and Procedure of Parliament

where notices regarding certain matters which though not primarily the concern of the
Union Government were admitted by the Speaker in view of their special significance
and public importance19 or because of the fact that they involved revenues of the

(vii) Day-to-Day administrative matters;

(viii) Frivolous or trivial matters;
(ix) The arrest of an individual cannot form the subject matter of a calling attention notice –
see, rulings of the Speaker, L.S. Deb., 24-3-1964, cc. 7145-47.
(x) Minor matters involving normal relations between the Union and the States or between the
States inter se;
(xi) Matters relating to autonomous corporations and local bodies;
(xii) Arrests, searches, confiscation of goods or issue of prohibitory orders under the normal
process of Law;
(xiii) International conventions or agreements entered in the normal course;
(xiv) Isolated border incidents with neighbouring countries;
(xv) Communication or messages exchanged between the Government of India and Governments
of foreign countries in the normal course;
(xvi) Statements about India made by foreign dignitaries or individuals of which no special note
need be taken;
(xvii) Minor developments about a continuing matter on which a statement has already been
made;
(xviii) Visits of foreign dignitaries or on talks held between foreign dignitaries and Ministers of
the Government of India about which communiques are issued in the normal course;
(xix) Appointments of Governors or formation of Ministries in States unless a grave violation
of the constitutional machinery is involved;
(xx) Incidents or speeches in a State Legislature. [A calling attention notice regarding violation
of the sanctity of a State Legislature was, however, allowed as a special case even though
law and order is a State subject—L.S. Deb., 1-8-1969, cc. 236-37; and 6-8-1969,
cc. 231-43];
(xxi) Incidents in foreign Parliaments;
(xxii) Other matters of unimportant nature—see Min. (R.C. 4 L.S.), 10-7-1967.
19. A notice regarding the situation in the Middle East arising out of the presence of foreign troops
in Lebanon and Jordan was admitted and a statement in response thereto was made in the
Lok Sabha on 14 August 1958—see L.S. Deb., 14-8-1958, cc. 857-70.
A notice on the alleged harassment of a marriage party of Scheduled Caste people in a village
in Tehri (U.P.) on 14 January 1959, though primarily the concern of the State Government, was
admitted by the Speaker in view of its special significance and a statement in response thereto was
made in the House on 20 February 1959—see L.S. Deb., 20-2-1959, cc. 2176-77.
A notice regarding members of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly not being allowed to
take oath in Urdu language was admitted not with a view to discussing the action of the Presiding
Officer but to consider the constitutional issues arising therefrom and national importance of the
matter—L.S. Deb., 20-3-1969, c. 201.
A notice regarding violation of sanctity of a State Legislature premises was allowed even
though law and order is a State subject—L.S. Deb., 1-8-1969, cc. 232-239; 4-8-1969, c. 236; and
6-8-1969, cc. 231-43.
A notice regarding the reported effort by the Congress President to bring pressure and undue
influence on members of the Bihar Assembly in connection with the Presidential election was
admitted in view of the public importance of the matter—L.S. Deb., 7-8-1969, cc. 227-51.
 Calling Attention to Matters of Urgent Public Importance 551

Union Government or assistance and grants by the Union Government20.

A notice is normally disallowed or may be kept pending if an intimation has
already been received from the Minister that he will make or lay on the Table a
statement on the subject suo motu21 or if the subject is likely to be raised on another
motion which has been admitted for discussion22. However, the Speaker has the
discretion to admit a notice even when the Minister has informed that he would make
a statement on the subject suo motu23. In view of the urgency of the matter and the
demand for an immediate statement being made in the House the Chair may permit
the Minister to make the statement suo motu and disallow the calling attention notice
on the subject already admitted for the following day24. On matters of public

A notice regarding the reported hunger strike by the Chief Minister of a State over the
widespread violence and lawlessness in the State was admitted because the House, as the Speaker
observed, was entitled to know the reasons behind such a fast which was an unusual thing— L.S.
Deb., 3-12-1969, cc. 194-212.
A notice regarding reported incident of burning alive of some Harijan women and children in
a village in U.P. was admitted. When the item was taken up on 2-8-1972, the Minister made a
statement that the State Government had no information of such an occurrence and that a statement
would be laid on the Table on receipt of a report from the State Government. On the request of
the members, the item was postponed and on 9-8-1972, the item was taken up again when the
Minister made the statement and answered clarificatory questions—L.S. Deb., 2-8-1972,
cc. 172-76 and 9-8-1972, cc. 182-94.
20. Calling Attention Notices on the following subjects were admitted—
(i) A bogus payment of Rs. 3.77 crore from the revenues of the Union Government for transportation
of fertilizers as disclosed in the Third Report dt. 16-3-1970 of P.A.C., Andhra Pradesh Legislature—
L.S. Deb., 13-4-1970, cc. 210-31. (ii) Reported stoppage of grant by the U.G.C. to several colleges
in Punjab and Haryana resulting in the closure of these colleges—L.S. Deb., 5-12-1972,
cc. 199-223. (iii) Reported lack of assistance to Rajasthan by the Union Government to tide over
famine conditions prevailing in 12,500 villages there—L.S. Deb., 15-12-1972, cc. 203-321.
21. Two calling attention notices were received on 11 January 1960, regarding the Dakota Crash on
the Indo-Tibetan border on 3 January 1960. Notices of 21 questions were also received on the
same subject. All the notices were kept pending in view of the intimation received from the
Ministry of Transport and Communications that the Minister would make a statement suo motu
on the subject in the House on 10 February 1960, and, thereafter, the calling attention notices and
notices of questions were disallowed.
At the time the statement was being made by the Minister, the Speaker, however, made a
reference in the House that he had received two calling attention notices and notices of
21 questions on the subject.
22. L.S. Deb., 14-8-1963, c. 412.
23. Two calling attention notices were received on 20 April 1960 regarding the strike of road transport
operators in Bombay. The Ministry of Transport and Communications informed that the Minister
would make a statement on the subject suo motu in the House on 27 April 1960. The Speaker
directed that the statement should be made in response to the calling attention notice.
On 6 April 1985, twenty members tabled notices on several Railway accidents and particularly
the one involving Howrah-Amritsar Mail and the Howrah-Amritsar Express on 5 April 1985. The
Minister of Railways informed on the same day that he would make a statement suo motu on the
subject on 8 April 1985. It was decided that the statement should be made by the Minister in
response to the calling attention notices. Accordingly, calling attention notices were admitted and
the Minister made the statement on 8 April 1985—L.S. Deb., 8-4-1985, cc. 459-60.
24. L.S. Deb., 23-11-1973, cc. 335-38.
552 Practice and Procedure of Parliament

importance, Ministers are expected to make statements in the House suo motu25.
Notices on a subject which have either lapsed or have been disallowed may be
revived by tabling fresh notices26.

Procedure for Calling Attention

When a notice is admitted by the Speaker on the same day, an entry showing
the position at which the item will be taken up is inserted in the List of Business for
the use of the Speaker, and the text of the matter to be raised is prepared for the use
of the Speaker, member concerned, Minister and officers at the Table. In case the
notice is admitted for the following or any subsequent day, an entry of the admitted
text is made in the printed List of Business.
Admitted notices are normally taken up in the House at the stage laid down in
Direction 2 but, in special cases they may be taken up later in the day27.
On being called by the Speaker, the member in whose name the item has been
put down in the List of Business rises in his place and calls the attention of the
Minister concerned to the matter and requests the Minister to make a statement
thereon28. A member, in whose name a calling attention notice appears in the List of
Business, cannot authorise another member to call attention on his behalf.
On his attention being called, the Minister may make a statement if he is in
possession of all the facts of the case. Where the information asked for is not available
with the Minister at the time, it is open to him to ask for time to make a statement
at a later hour or date29. The Speaker may direct the statement to be made at the end
of the day, or, in his discretion, give time more than once to make a statement if the

25. On 26 July 1977, a member raised a point of order in the Lok Sabha that on an important matter
like the visit of the External Affairs Minister to Nepal, who according to the member, should have
made a statement on his own instead of doing so only in response to a calling attention notice.
The Speaker agreed with the member’s contention and observed that it would have been proper
for the Minister to come forward with a statement on his own.
26. In Dir. 2, the order of Precedence of such notices is xxii.
27. L.S. Deb., 30-11-1962, cc. 3059, 3970-78; 23-4-1963, cc. 11350-51; 19-3-1965, cc. 4940-60;
28-3-1966, cc. 8157, 8269-75; 9-11-1966, cc. 2138-62; 26-8-1970, cc. 167-68; 24-6-1971,
cc. 155-59, 264-81; 23-7-1971, cc. 150-55, 224-37; 20-3-1973, cc. 191-93, 382-412; 23-3-1973,
cc. 206-08; 10-4-1975, cc. 226-33.
28. If a notice is received in Hindi, it is usually the practice that the statement should be in Hindi—
See L.S. Deb., 20-11-1963, cc. 661-62. After the installation of the simultaneous interpretation
system, it is now left to the Minister to make the statement in a language of his own choice, Hindi
or English.
29. Rule 197(1). For instances where a Minister asked for and was given time to make statement at
a later date, see L.S. Deb., 22-8-1963, cc. 2076-77 and 26-8-1963, cc. 2600-02; 13-9-1963,
cc. 6007-12 and 16-9-1963, cc. 6254-60; 1-5-1964, cc. 13587-59 and 4-5-1964, cc. 1466-70;
22-9-1964, cc. 3049-55 and 24-9-1964, cc. 3494-3500; 2-12-1964, cc. 2891-92 and 3-12-1964,
cc. 3266-70; 16-12-1964, cc. 5328-30 and 17-12-1964, cc. 5425-30; 2-8-1972, cc. 172-76 and
9-8-1972, cc. 182-94.
Under Directions of the Speaker, statement had been made later on the same day and question
asked thereon. L.S. Deb., 7-3-1968, cc. 2215-17 and 2341-55.
 Calling Attention to Matters of Urgent Public Importance 553

Minister makes a request to that effect. The expression “ask for time to make a
statement at a later hour or date” in the Rule has been held not to preclude the
extension of time being asked for or given more than once30.
A statement promised to be made on a particular day on a matter to which the
attention of the Minister concerned had been called by a member earlier is not
postponed to a later day at the request of that member, if other signatories to that
notice are not in favour of its postponement31.
If the statement is short, the Minister usually reads it out to the House. This is
followed by questions by members whose names appear in the List of Business.
Replies thereto are given by the Ministers, at times by other Ministers, including the
Prime Minister, depending upon the question asked and allowed by the Speaker32. But
if the statement to be made is lengthy, the Speaker may ask the Minister to read out
a synopsis of the statement and lay the complete statement on the Table33. In such
cases, the usual practice, for the members, is to study the statement and to ask
questions thereon at a later hour, usually at the end of the day, if so fixed by the
Speaker, or during the next sitting of the House34; where a statement is lengthy and
is normally to be laid on the Table, Ministers are required to supply copies thereof
in advance to Table Office latest by 1030 hours, on the day, with a view to making
them available to the members concerned35. When copies of the statement are made
available to members in advance, questions are asked and answered by the Minister36,
when the statement is laid on the Table. Even if copies of the statement to be made
by the Minister have been made available to members in advance, which is now done
in almost every case37, the Minister has a right to amend his statement till he makes
it in the House but he has to give prior information to the Table38.
If the statement does not give full information, the matter is kept pending to
enable the Minister to make a further statement on the subject, and the members who

30. See L.S. Deb., 1-4-1965, cc. 7193-95; 2-4-1965, cc. 7427-54; 5-4-1965, cc. 7657-88.
31. Ibid., 8-12-1965, c. 6349; 9-12-1965, cc. 6584, 6683-93.
32. A statement in response to a notice can be made by any Minister and it is not necessary that the
seniormost Minister of the Ministry concerned should personally make the statement—L.S. Deb.,
8-3-1965, cc. 2977-78.
33. L.S. Deb., 1-10-1955, c. 15021; 29-3-1956, cc. 3719-20; 22-8-1957, cc. 8212-14, 11-2-1960,
cc. 533-36; and 22-2-1960, cc. 2099-2101.
34. Ibid., 28-11-1963, cc. 1991, 2111-16; 10-12-1963, cc. 3934-35, 4078-87.
35. Ibid., 10-11-1965, cc. 1100-01.
It has been observed by the Speaker that if copies of the statement in question were not
received in time, the item would be taken up only towards the end of the day and till then the
Minister concerned would have to wait—L.S. Deb., 31-8-1970, c. 213.
36. L.S. Deb., 25-11-1965, cc. 3856-62.
37. On 9-8-1973, a circular was issued by the Secretariat to all Ministries asking them to send
advance copies of the statement in response to a calling attention notice by 1000 hrs. on the day
on which it is to be made so that copies are made available to the Speaker and members concerned
before the commencement of the sitting.
38. L.S. Deb., 14-5-1973, cc. 1-6.
554 Practice and Procedure of Parliament

have tabled the notice are permitted to ask questions when further statement is made39.
Questions by way of clarification on a calling attention statement are to be
restricted to the subject matter of the admitted notice40, and should not reflect upon
conduct of persons in high authority41, nor seek an assurance42. Where a statement is
based on the first information report lodged with the police or a matter under judicial
enquiry, questions on the statement may be allowed to a restricted degree confining
to procedure, subject and stage of inquiry43; questions on the merits of the case are
not permitted44 and no individual allegedly involved in the incident is allowed to be
referred by name.
If the first member in whose name the item has been put down is not present
when called by the Chair, the next member in the List may call the attention of the
Minister. If the members in whose name the matter has been put down in the List of
Business are not present in the House when the item is reached, the Minister does not
make a statement but, with the permission of the Speaker, may lay the statement on
the Table. The statement so laid is shown in the proceedings and the Bulletin as not
having been laid in response to the calling attention but as one laid by the Minister
suo motu45. Where the matter is very important, the Speaker may permit a Minister
to make the statement in the House but in this case also the statement is treated as
having been made suo motu and not in response to the calling attention notice46.
However, it is not obligatory on the part of a Minister to make or lay the statement
if the member/members concerned either decline to call his attention or are not
present in the House when the item is reached47.
There cannot be any debate on a statement at the time it is made by the
Minister48. There is, however, no bar on a notice being given for a debate on a

39. Ibid., 26-11-1963, cc. 1472-73; 29-11-1963, cc. 2222-28; and 2-8-1968, c. 3884; 21-8-1968,
cc.3331-40; 2-8-1972, cc. 172-76 and 9-8-1972, cc. 182-94.
40. Ibid., 2-4-1969, c. 139.
41. Ibid., 3-3-1969, cc. 217-18.
42. Ibid., 4-8-1970, c. 242.
43. Ibid., 26-3-1973, cc. 202-09.
44. Ibid., 5-4-1965, cc. 7655-56.
45. Ibid., 17-12-1958, c. 5694; 26-2-1959, cc. 3213-14. See also L.S. Deb., 21-3-1960, c. 6989. In
one case, calling attention re: inadequate supplies of coal to industries in Northern India was
included in the List of Business for 14 March 1962 but when the item was reached, the member
concerned was absent. He repeated the notice the next day but it was disallowed—L.S. Deb.,
14-3-1962, c. 275.
46. L.S. Deb., 30-9-1955, cc. 15848-50.
47. Ibid., 7-8-1970, c. 221.
A calling attention regarding death of some army officers during their assault on Mount Everest
was put down in the List of Business in the names of two members, for 26 November 1985. When
the item was taken up, neither of the members was present in the House to call the attention of
the Minister. The Minister was not, therefore, called to make/lay a statement and the next item
on the Agenda was taken up and the calling attention notice lapsed—L.S. Deb., 26-11-1985,
c. 287.
48. Rule 197(2).
 Calling Attention to Matters of Urgent Public Importance 555

subsequent date on a matter contained in the statement49.

Only one clarificatory question can be asked on a calling attention statement by
each member whose names appear in the List of Business. If the question so asked
is disallowed, the member cannot normally ask another question50. No questions may
be permitted to be asked if such is the desire of the House51. Members whose names
do not appear in the List of Business are not permitted to ask questions. However,
there are occasions when the Speaker has allowed the members to ask clarificatory
questions even if their names did not appear in the List of Business52.
Clarificatory questions asked by members should not be so lengthy as to
convert the calling attention into a debate. Generally, a calling attention matter should
take not more than half-an-hour and, in exceptionally important cases, not more than
30 to 45 minutes. The member calling attention can take ten minutes and other
members 2-5 minutes each. The Minister replies at the end to all questions asked by
the members in whose names the item is listed. The Chair cannot compel a Minister
to answer each and every clarificatory question in a particular way53.
In the event of more than one matter being presented for the same sitting,
priority is given to the matter which, in the opinion of the Speaker, is more urgent and
important54. The second matter cannot be raised by the same members who have
raised the first matter. It may be taken up at or immediately before the end of the
sitting as the Speaker may fix55. Also, the Minister concerned may make a brief
statement in respect of the first matter and in respect of the second matter, a statement
may be laid on the Table by the Minister concerned.
A copy of the statement laid is supplied to each of the members in whose names
the item stands in the List of Business56. If the Prime Minister is to make a statement

49. Ruling by the Speaker—see L.S. Deb., 27-6-1967, cc. 7825-47.

50. L.S. Deb., 30-8-1963, c. 3611; 13-9-1963, c. 6009.
51. Ibid., 23-3-1964, c. 6913; see also 23-11-1969, cc. 3361-71.
52. Ibid., 20-11-1963, cc. 646-49; 3-12-1963, cc. 2741-44.
However, a member whose name was not in the List of Business was, as a special case,
permitted to ask a clarificatory question on the calling attention statement re. burning of the
Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem in view of the religious importance of the matter—L.S. Deb.,
26-8-1969, cc. 263-64.
For more such instances see L.S. Deb., 20-2-1979, cc. 334-35, 8-5-1981, cc. 280-81;
5-8-1988, cc. 336-37; 10-5-1990, cc. 462-63; 31-3-1992, cc. 341; 27-11-1996, cc. 217-24;
8-5-2007, cc. 478-92; 20-8-2007, cc. 304-20; 14-8-2006, cc. 261, 263-68 and 276-84; 17-5-2006,
cc. 410-35; 6-3-2006, cc. 331-50; 18-3-2008, cc. 521-540; 11-12-2009, cc. 58-68; 20-12-2011,
cc. 73-87; 29-12-2011, cc. 7672-7703.
53. L.S. Deb., 22-7-1977, cc. 349-50 and Bn. Part II, 14-11-1985, and Min. (RC) 28-8-1985.
54. Rule 197(4).
On 15 April 1954, after the Prime Minister had made a statement under this Rule regarding
the applicability of the North Atlantic and Anglo-Portuguese Treaties to Goa, he sought the
permission of the Chair to make another statement under the same Rule on a different subject.
The Speaker withheld his permission—See H.P. Deb. (II), 15-4-1954, c. 4810.
55. Rule 197(3), Proviso.
56. Dir. 47A(1).
556 Practice and Procedure of Parliament

in response to one of the two calling attention matters on a day, that matter may be
given inter se priority in the List of Business57. If a notice received on the last day
of a session is admitted for that day but the Minister concerned is unable to make a
statement, the Speaker may direct the Minister to furnish to the Secretariat, at a later
date, a note giving the required information for onward transmission to the member
who has tabled the notice58.
A calling attention notice which has been admitted and put down in the List of
Business may be withdrawn by the members concerned with the Chair’s permission,
on so stating their intention on the floor of the House59.

Conversion of Calling Attention into Short Duration Discussion

A notice of a calling attention on matters of urgent public importance, admitted
for a particular day may, with the permission of the Speaker and on the basis of the
consensus of the House, be converted into Short Duration Discussion.
There have been occasions when the Speaker agreed to convert a calling attention,
on a subject included on the order paper into Short Duration Discussion, to be taken
up either on the same day or any other subsequent day60.

Scope of Statements
A statement made in response to a calling attention notice is not in the nature
of an answer to a question and, therefore, it need not be confined to facts alone. The
statement can include opinions, conclusions and decisions of the Government or the
Minister and it is not necessary that it should be of a nature on which there should
be complete agreement in the House. Similarly, the questions which are asked on such
a statement are in the nature of suggestions, criticisms and counter-opinions and,
therefore, there is no restriction that the original statements as well as the subsequent
questions and answers should be confined to mere facts alone.
Such statements are open to debate. The only restriction is that there cannot be
any debate on such statements at the time they are made. There is no prohibition
against a notice being given for a debate on a subsequent date on a matter contained
in the statement of a Minister in response to a calling attention notice. Hence, if a
section of the House is not in agreement with the opinions or conclusions given by
a Minister in his statement, they are at liberty to raise a debate and to have the opinion
of the House recorded on a proper motion or question before the House61.

57. Dir. 47A(2).

58. L.S. Deb., 17-5-1966, c. 17299.
59. Ibid., 25-11-1965, c. 3850; 22-7-1971, cc. 173-74.
60. L.S. Deb., 19-2-1975, cc. 213-17; 20-2-1975, cc. 202-03 and 393-457; 12-8-1987, cc. 363-67;
17-8-1987, cc. 430-84; 24-8-1987, c. 771; 18-11-1987, c. 353; 23-11-1987, c. 420; 30-3-1988,
c. 241; 12-4-1988, c. 517; 3-5-1990, cc. 476-78 and 485; 16-5-2006; cc. 418-27; 7-12-2006,
c. 338; 24-8-2007, cc. 307-08.
61. Ruling by the Speaker—L.S. Deb., 28-6-1967, c. 8118.
 Calling Attention to Matters of Urgent Public Importance 557

Clubbing of Names
Normally a notice is not admitted on a subject on which a short notice question
has been admitted and vice versa. Where a calling attention notice and a short notice
question are tabled on the same subject simultaneously, a Minister may select either
of the notices for answer. On receiving the intimation from the Minister, the Speaker
may admit the notice selected by the former unless he has already admitted the calling
attention notice62. The ballot under Rule 54(4) for clubbing names on an admitted
short notice question is restricted only to members tabling short notice questions on
that subject. Names of members tabling calling attention notices on the subject are not
included therein63.
Whenever a Minister makes a statement in response to a calling attention notice,
he is expected to answer all the points that might have been raised in the short notice
questions or other questions received on the same subject and notices of which may
have reached him before that date.
On 19 March 1958, Speaker Ayyangar observed that whenever a Minister made
a statement on the floor of the House in pursuance of an earlier direction of the
Speaker or the House or in response to a calling attention notice, he should cover all
the points that had been raised on the subject in various notices, copies of which
would have reached him by then64.
Generally, the House does not recommend to the Government any action to be
taken on the basis of a calling attention notice, but sometimes questions are in the
form of suggestions and the Government indicate in their replies whether they are in
a position to accept them or not65.

62. Under Rule 54(1), a short notice question can be admitted only if the Minister agrees to answer
the question at short notice, but a calling attention notice can be admitted without any reference
to the Minister concerned.
63. L.S. Deb., 6-12-1977, cc. 275-77.
64. See L.S. Deb., 19-3-1958, cc. 5615-16.
65. For instance, in the case of the plight of Indians in Burma following the nationalization of
business controlled by Indians in Burma, the members insisted that officials of the Ministry of
External Affairs should be sent to inquire into the grievances of Indians there and plead with the
Government of Burma to agree to their repatriation in an orderly manner. The suggestion was
accepted by the Government—see L.S. Deb., 28-4-1964, cc. 13180-97.