Didn’t get any notice from high command or state unit chief, says Maha CLP leader Vijay Wadettiwar  

New Delhi, July 17 The Maharashtra Congress Legislative Party (CLP) leader, Vijay Wadettiwar, on Thursday, denied receiving any notice, either from the party high command or the state unit chief, for not putting up any resistance to the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, passed recently in the Assembly.

Speaking to reporters, the Congress leader claimed that he was not present in the Assembly when the contentious bill was introduced in the House and hence couldn’t voice opposition and register the party’s firm stand on it.

Vijay Wadettiwar, facing fire from within the party, was reportedly served a notice by the Maharashtra Congress chief, on the instructions from top brass, demanding an explanation as to why the public security bill was passed in the Assembly without any protest from the grand old party.

“I did not even know when this bill was going to come. I had no information about it on 9th July. The same day, I had to go to Delhi. If I had been there, I would have torn the copy of the bill and strongly protested. But, when I was not there, what can I say about it now?" he told the scribes.

He, however, said the Congress MLAs had worked out a strategy to oppose the bill, but he didn’t get an opportunity to speak in the House.

When quizzed further, the CLP leader sought to turn the tables on the Maha Congress chief, Harshwardhan Sapkal, and said that he should come forward and share information on which members voiced opposition and in what manner.

He also accused the ruling dispensation of bulldozing the bill through the House, on the back of its absolute majority.

Last week, both Houses of the Assembly passed the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024, which seeks to prevent unlawful activities of Left-wing extremist organisations with a focus on 'urban Naxalism'.

The central leadership of the Congress party was reportedly miffed with the state unit, owing to its ‘meek surrender’ in the House, despite the issue being discussed at the highest level and a clear message being conveyed to the state unit.

Notably, the bill was passed in the Assembly on July 10, without Congress either registering a protest over the bill or submitting a dissent note in the Assembly. The dissent came from SS(UBT) legislators and a lone CPI(M) MLA, who criticised the legislator as "extremely harsh and undemocratic".

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor