Admitted or submitted? Crucial technicality over Justice Varma motion in spotlight after Dhankar's exit

Former Vice-President and Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar’s abrupt resignation on Monday has stirred a constitutional and political storm, particularly over his handling of a motion seeking the removal of Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma.

At the centre of the controversy is a crucial legal distinction: was the notice filed by 63 Opposition MPs merely submitted, or was it admitted by Dhankhar? That difference isn’t just semantic—it could determine who gets to pick the three-member panel that will examine the charges against Justice Varma.

A move that upset the govt

According to TOI sources, Dhankhar earned the ire of the ruling establishment by taking cognisance of the Opposition’s Rajya Sabha notice for initiating proceedings against Justice Varma.

This, despite the government having already signalled its preference to initiate the process in the Lok Sabha, backed by signatures from 145 MPs across party lines. That notice had been submitted earlier on Monday to Speaker Om Birla.

While Dhankhar’s move may have been procedurally valid—the Rajya Sabha notice had the required minimum of 50 signatories—it was seen by the government as undermining its broader strategy to build an all-party consensus on the judge’s removal.

Notably, the Rajya Sabha motion was signed only by Opposition MPs.

The Legal Tangle: Submission vs Admission

In a statement made in the Upper House on Monday afternoon, Dhankhar referred to the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, noting that when such notices are received in both Houses on the same day, no inquiry committee can be formed unless the motion is admitted by both.

If admitted in both Houses, the Speaker and the Chairman are to jointly form the committee.

Crucially, however, he stopped short of stating that he had formally admitted the motion, instead noting that it met the numerical requirement. He also argued that the Speaker or Chairman has no discretion to reject or admit such a motion if presented simultaneously in both Houses—a claim that legal experts say is not explicitly supported by the 1968 Act.

He directed the Rajya Sabha Secretary General to initiate further steps, a move that suggested at least partial procedural endorsement.

Who will decide now?

With Dhankhar's resignation accepted by President Droupadi Murmu, Deputy Chairman Harivansh has taken over as officiating Rajya Sabha Chairman.

His next steps will be closely watched.

“There’s no guarantee he will back Dhankhar’s reading of the situation,” a senior official told TOI. "In any case, he has no special interest in matters concerning judiciary and is unlikely to diverge drastically from the speaker in the choice of the members of the inquiry panel," the source further said.