BJP demands Patnaik's reply on 'misuse' of discretionary quota

Bhubaneswar: Odisha Assembly was adjourned twice today due to ruckus by BJP members demanding a statement from Naveen Patnaik on alleged misuse of discretionary quota for allotment of house and plots to a BJD MP's family and a minister's involvement in illegal apartment constructions.

The issue was raised in the Assembly during Zero Hour by BJP legislature party leader Basant Panda.

"While one minister is involved in illegal apartment constructions, another former minister and BJD MP has acquired five houses and plots in the name of his wife and son under discretionary quota," Panda alleged.

He pointed out the state Housing and Urban Development minister had admitted in the House that a minister was engaged in illegal building constructions in Bhubaneswar.

However, no action was taken against the minister concerned and the MP, Panda said seeking a ruling from the Speaker.

The BJP leader also demanded a statement from the Chief Minister on the issue.

As Speaker Niranjan Pujari rejected BJP's demand and maintained that the issue should not be raised in the House again, angry BJP members rushed to the Well of the House and attempted to disrupt proceedings.

BJP members including Radhrani Panda, Duryodhan Majhi, Rabi Narayan Nayak and K V Singhdeo demanded a statement from Patnaik.

Opposition Congress members, who had also raised the issue in the House earlier, supported BJP's demand by shouting from their seats. Some Congress members also joined the BJP members and trooped into the Well.

As the din continued, Pujari first adjourned the House for ten minutes till 12 noon and later till 3 PM.

The Congress members had yesterday alleged that Rajya Sabha MP Kalpataru Das had acquired two houses from the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA) in the name of his son Pranab Balabantray, who was elected to the Assembly from the Dhamasala Assembly seat this time.

Das, who is also the leader of the BJD's parliamentary party in Rajya Sabha, however, said his wife and son were two separate individuals and there was no wrong in taking houses in their names separately.