THE MINISTER OF FINANCE (SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM): Sir, I move: That the Bill to provide for the establishment of an Authority to promote old age income security by establishing, developing and regulating pension funds, to protect the interests of sub..

THE MINISTER OF FINANCE (SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM): Sir, I move: That the Bill to provide for the establishment of an Authority to promote old age income security by establishing, developing and regulating pension funds, to protect the interests of subscribers to schemes of pension funds and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, as passed by Lok Sabha, be taken into consideration. Sir, the PFRDA Bill, 2011, was referred to the Standing Committee on Finance on the 29th March, 2011. The Standing Committee recommended enactment of the Bill with certain modifications. The Government has decided to accept all recommendations, some fully, one partially, and is unable to accept only one recommendation. The Government has not accepted the recommendation regarding facility of repayable advances from the pension accounts of subscribers, but withdrawals have been permitted. Accordingly, the Government introduced official amendments to the PFRDA Bill, 2011. These have been accepted by the Lok Sabha and the Bill has been passed with the official amendments.

SARDAR SUKHDEV SINGH DHINDSA: Will the Minister of MINORITY AFFAIRS be pleased to state:(a) whether the Punjab Wakf Board has recently submitted any memorandum to Government regarding amendments in the Wakf Act, 1995; (b) if so, the details thereo..

SARDAR SUKHDEV SINGH DHINDSA: Will the Minister of MINORITY AFFAIRS be pleased to state:(a) whether the Punjab Wakf Board has recently submitted any memorandum to Government regarding amendments in the Wakf Act, 1995; (b) if so, the details thereof; and (c) the Government's reaction thereto? THE MINISTER OF MINORITY AFFAIRS (SHRI K. RAHMAN KHAN): (a) The Punjab Wakf Board has submitted a memorandum regarding "Amendment in the Wakf Act, 1995" to the Hon'ble Prime Minister of India vide their letter dated 19.3.2013 which was received in the Ministry of Minority Affairs vide PMO ID No. 3724319/PMO/2013-PoI dated 26.3.2013. The Punjab Wakf Board has also submitted another memorandum on this issue to Shri Sukhdev Singh Libra, Hon'ble Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha vide their letter dated 12.4.2013 which was received in this Ministry from the Office of the Hon'ble Finance Minister's office vide letter dated 01.05.2013. 

THE MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI KAPIL SIBAL):Sir, I move: That the Bill to further amend the Constitution of India, be taken into consideration. Sir, the moments sometimes come in..

THE MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI KAPIL SIBAL):Sir, I move: That the Bill to further amend the Constitution of India, be taken into consideration. Sir, the moments sometimes come in the life of a nation when you need to revisit the past and you embrace the future. These moments have happened in the recent past in the form of the Food Security Bill, and Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill. One such moment is here today with reference to the amendment to article 124. Sir, the original provision of article 124 (2) stated that the President of India shall appoint Judges to the Supreme Court and the High Courts in the States in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and such of the other Judges that the President may deem necessary for the purpose. Every Judge of the Supreme Court is appointed by the President, by warrant under his hand and seal. This was incorporated in the Constitution at its inception Thereafter, Sir, after a long period of time, it was felt that the provision was not functioning or working 38 Government [RAJYA SABHA] Bills as well as it should have. In 1990, when the National Front Government came into being, for the first time they proposed that we should have a Judicial Commission for appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court and to the High Courts. That was part of the agenda of the then National Front Government. Thereafter, Sir, in 1993 the Supreme Court in the Advocates on Record Association case sought to change this procedure through an interpretation of article 124(2) of the Constitution. With the greatest respect to the Supreme Court, I do believe that in that process they rewrote the Constitution. I will just share with you what they did. Under article 124(2), the President who represents the Executive decides or has to decide who should be a Judge of the Supreme Court or of the High Court in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and other Judges.