Samajwadi Party and RJD on Monday created uproar in the Lok Sabha opposing a bill to amend a law governing properties left behind by those who went to Pakistan during partition.
Dubbing the Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2010 as anti-Muslim, members of the two parties stormed the Well and forced adjournment of the House for an hour.
Government's assurances that it was bringing amendments to address their concerns created more problems, with BJP and Shiv Sena turning aggressive against any change in the measure.
The Bill makes it clear that courts would have no jurisdiction over occupation of properties which have been left behind by those who went to Pakistan at the time of Partition.
Enemy properties are those left behind by people who went to Pakistan during partition. There are about 2,000 such properties in the country.
Raising the matter during Zero Hour, SP chief, Mr Mulayam Singh, said the bill would "snatch the rights of the Muslims who stayed back in India" and went against a Supreme Court verdict which had granted them the right over properties which were left behind by their forefathers.
"It is a bill that would make Muslims second-class citizens and create an inferiority complex among them," he said, adding that the apex court had made it clear that the custodian of such properties, which was the government, should return them to the inheritors.
The SP chief was supported by RJD leader, Mr Lalu Prasad.
Seeking to counter the charge, Parliamentary affairs minister, Mr P.K. Bansal said the government was bringing appropriate amendments to take care of the concerns raised by Yadav. "They will answer all his doubts," he said appealing for unanimous passage of the measure.
This prompted a sharp response from Leader of Opposition, Ms Sushma Swaraj, who declared that her party would support the measure only in the original form and strongly oppose any amendments. "Send it to Standing Committee," was her refrain.
The SP leader alleged that the home minister, Mr P. Chidambaram had brought the bill after failing to secure a verdict favourable to him as a counsel before the Supreme Court.
He charged the BJP and the Congress with being hand-in-glove in the matter as two BJP members of the Rajya Sabha had also appeared as counsels in the case.
The bill, which seeks to replace the 1968 Act, was moved in view of a number of court judgements that "adversely affected the powers" of the custodians and the Government of India as provided under the law. Once passed, it would replace an ordinance promulgated on July 2.