Hoping that the Congress would not obstruct future legislation, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Monday said that the government had repeatedly engaged with the principal Opposition party on the Delimitation Amendment Bill but had not been given any time for discussions.In a letter to Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, who had earlier written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi demanding an all-party meeting on the matter, Rijiju said the Congress had been repeatedly engaged on the issue, as had other political parties.”The government has consistently sought the Opposition’s support and cooperation for the consideration and passage of the Delimitation Amendment Bill.”The government has reached out to the Congress, being the principal Opposition party, on several occasions. I wrote to you on March 16, 2026, March 26, 2026, and April 12, 2026, in this regard. Besides these written communications, I also discussed the matter with you personally and sought your support and cooperation.””During the Monsoon Session, I also met Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, in person to discuss the matter and seek his cooperation. However, despite repeated requests, the Congress did not provide dates for discussions, following which the government extended its outreach to other political parties,” Rijiju said in his letter.He said consultations were held with representatives of parties, including the DMK, SP, YSRCP, NCP, Shiv Sena (UBT), AIMIM and BJD, with a view to facilitating dialogue and building a broader consensus in support of the proposed legislation.”In these circumstances, it is not clear why the demand for consultation is being made repeatedly when the government has already made sustained efforts to facilitate dialogue. What is now required is constructive cooperation from Opposition parties rather than a repetition of the same demand without due regard to the consultations already undertaken,” the minister said.He said these efforts reflected the government’s firm commitment to consultation and constructive parliamentary engagement.”I reiterate that the government remains committed to the basic principles of parliamentary democracy and to facilitating meaningful dialogue through the effective functioning of Parliament. We value the participation of all political parties in deliberations and discussions on all matters of national importance. I also hope that the Congress will play a constructive role and will not obstruct important future legislation,” Rijiju said.Responding to Kharge’s repeated contention that Parliament had not been prorogued after the House was adjourned sine die on August 13, Rijiju said the practice was neither uncommon nor contrary to constitutional principles.”With regard to your observation that Parliament has not been prorogued even though 64 days have elapsed since the House was adjourned sine die on August 13, 2026, I would like to clarify that there is no constitutional requirement prescribing a specific period within which a House must be prorogued following its adjournment sine die,” the minister said.He said the mere fact that a House had not been prorogued during such an interval did not, by itself, give rise to any constitutional or procedural impropriety or irregularity.”There have been innumerable instances in the past in which Houses remained unprorogued for long periods, extending up to 87 days. In 2008, the Lok Sabha sat for two days, on July 21 and 22, to consider a confidence motion. The House was then kept unprorogued, reconvened on October 17, 2008, and adjourned on October 24 to meet again on December 10.”There have been several other such instances: 1987 (76 days), 1989 (54 days), 2006 (49 days), 2013 (49 days) and 1963 (41 days),” he said.