The Lok Sabha is set to consider a notice for the removal of Speaker Om Birla during the second part of the Budget Session (9‑11 March 2026). Both the Congress and the BJP have issued whips directing MPs to be present, underscoring the political gravity of the issue. Key Developments Opposition MPs filed a resolution alleging partisan behaviour by Speaker Om Birla ; 118 MPs signed it. The Trinamool Congress abstained, urging a step‑by‑step escalation and a chance for the Speaker to defend himself. During the first part of the session, Rahul Gandhi (Leader of Opposition) was interrupted while quoting the unpublished memoir of former Army Chief General Naravane . Eight Opposition members were suspended for “throwing papers at the Chair” and will miss the second part of the session. The Motion of Thanks was passed on 5 Feb without a reply from Prime Minister Narendra Modi . Speaker Birla announced he would not attend proceedings until the no‑confidence motion against him is resolved. Important Facts Historical precedents: Speakers G. V. Mavlankar (1954), Hukam Singh (1966), and Balram Jakhar (1987) all survived similar motions. First such resolution was filed in 1954 when Opposition strength was ~50 MPs against Congress’s 364 in a 489‑member house. Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh emphasized the democratic nature of such instruments. UPSC Relevance This episode illustrates the functioning of parliamentary procedures, the role of the Speaker, and the use of party whips—core topics for GS‑2 (Polity) . Understanding the historical precedents of Speaker removal motions helps answer questions on parliamentary democracy and checks on legislative authority. The incident also touches upon the interplay between the executive (Prime Minister) and legislature, a frequent theme in essay and answer‑writing sections. Way Forward Parliament is likely to debate the resolution in the upcoming session. If the motion gains majority support, it could set a precedent for stricter accountability of the Speaker, potentially prompting reforms in the impartiality norms. Conversely, a defeat would reaffirm the existing conventions protecting the Speaker’s tenure. Aspirants should monitor the outcome, analyze voting patterns, and assess implications for future parliamentary reforms.