Jagdeep Dhankhar not the first Indian Vice President to resign midterm — here's who did it before and why
Dhankhar's resignation comes hours after he presided over the first sitting of Rajya Sabha as chairperson during the Monsoon Session of Parliament that began on July 21. Vice President of India is the chairperson of Rajya Sabha.
"To prioritise health care and abide by medical advice, I hereby resign as the Vice President of India, effective immediately, in accordance with Article 67(a) of the Constitution.
The Vice President of India is the second-highest constitutional office in the government of India after the President. In accordance with Article 63 of the Constitution of India, the Vice President discharges the functions of the President when a contingency arises due to the President's resignation, removal, death, impeachment, or inability to discharge their functions.
Dhankhar is not the first Vice President to quit before the end of the term. But he is the first to quit for health reasons.
Many Vice Presidents of India have resigned before him from office since the post was established in 1952
To prioritise health care and abide by medical advice, I hereby resign as the Vice President of India, effective immediately.
In most cases, the reason has been to contest the Presidential election.
In May 1969, Vice President VV Giri resigned following the death of President Zakir Husain. Giri eventually won the elections to become the fourth President of India.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
Parliament News Live Updates: Lok Sabha to hold special discussion on 'Operation Sindoor' today
28 Jul 2025 | 08:05:23 AM IST The Lok Sabha is set to hold a special discussion on India's military response to the Pahalgam terror attack, known as 'Operation Sindoor'. The debate will involve top leaders from the ruling alliance and the Opposition. The discussion is expected to be triggered by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh's resignation as Vice President. Lok Sabha is set to hold a special discussion on 'Operation Sindoor', India's military response to the Pahalgam terror attack on Monday.A fiery debate on the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor is expected to unfold in Parliament, between top leaders from the ruling alliance and the Sabha List of Business for Monday states, "Special Discussion on India's strong, successful and decisive 'Operation Sindoor' in response to terrorist attack in Pahalgam".Twenty-six civilians were killed in the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir, after which India retaliated through precision strikes under Operation Sindoor, targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK).Meanwhile, the first week of the Monsoon session of Parliament witnessed major disruptions with the surprise resignation of Jagdeep Dhankhar as Vice Minister Rajnath Singh is likely to initiate the discussion on Operation Sindhoor in the Lok Sabha on Monday. Show more
Indian Express
32 minutes ago
- Indian Express
The language debate in Maharashtra and a soft sedition
A few weeks ago, a shopkeeper was allegedly attacked in Mumbai by Maharashtra Navnirman Sena workers for not speaking Marathi. Similar attacks have been reported across Maharashtra and other parts of India. In Bengaluru, destruction of Hindi-written signage is quite frequent, and in Tamil Nadu, anti-Hindi campaigns have a long history — they often resurface in response to perceived threats to Tamil. Even in Delhi, there is, at times, a subtle exclusion of those who speak with a southern accent or hail from the Northeast. Instances of regional prejudice feed into the trend of linguistic vigilantism that is increasingly spreading across the nation. These tendencies are not secessionist, but they undermine national integration and constitute a new type of 'soft sedition'. They represent a kind of regional hegemony that lives by cultural bullying, verbal violence and everyday discrimination. The underlying causes of this crisis resurfaced with the implementation of the New Education Policy (NEP) 2020, especially its three-language equation. NEP aims to develop multilingualism and enhance national integration, but its implementation requires students to be taught three languages, including at least two Indian languages. On paper, it allows states to choose these languages. However, in many parts of non-Hindi India, it was seen as a surreptitious advancement of Hindi and perceived as a threat to local languages. Politicians from all parties and regions play on people's fears. They have started muddying the waters again — overt threats against Hindi speakers and migrants from Northern regions are being justified as a counter to Hindi imposition. Even the national parties are hesitant to address this problem, for fear of alienating their state units. The crisis requires us to look again at the philosophical and constitutional basis of the republic. Article 1 of the Constitution says, 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.' This choice of words reflects a conscious rejection of the idea that states are sovereign, cultural or political entities. Unlike a federation that unites countries through treaties, India is a civilisational polity where states derive their legitimacy from the Union. The 1956 linguistic reorganisation was intended to accommodate diversity through better administration. Language does create a strong sense of identity and belonging in India, but it needs to be framed as a common resource — not the right of any state. It is the means through which we connect, share ideas, and forge relationships. Our linguistic diversity should not be a reason for division, but a means by which we understand and are understood. The Constitution gives every Indian citizen freedom through Articles 14, 19 and 21. Every Indian has the right not only to speak their language but also to work and reside throughout the country. A Bihari living in Bengaluru or a Manipuri living in Mumbai is not an outsider; they are equal citizens of the nation. This is not just a cultural sensitivity issue, but a matter of constitutional morality, which Ambedkar invoked while warning against majoritarian tyranny. Any attempt by political or local actors to create linguistic conformity is a violation of the Constitution. Linguistic violence impacts internal migration, which is essential for India's economy, by making workers fear discrimination in unfamiliar states. Such chauvinism exacerbates mistrust between linguistic groups. This anxiety proliferates into educational contexts, job interviews and housing preferences, shrinking the ambit of what it means to be Indian. Cultural majoritarianism does not simply become political, as Ashis Nandy warned, but alters how people see themselves and their social location. This leads us to refer to the phrase, 'soft sedition'. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, has updated how we interpret threats to the nation. BNS's Section 152 acknowledges that threats to the nation-state do not always take the form of rebellion, insurrection, or armed revolt. Language-based exclusion, violence and campaigning carve out zones of exclusion. Such ideological subversion must, therefore, be addressed as a potential national security threat and seen as an assault on 'the unity and integrity of India'. Supporters of regional identities argue that linguistic pride is crucial to India's federal character. They are not wrong. India's strength has always been its ability to bind together many languages, cultures and traditions. But diversity should not be confused with division. Love for one's mother tongue does not condone hostility towards another. The executive must act quickly and decisively. Law enforcement agencies should be directed to identify, monitor, report and prosecute language-based hate crimes under the new BNS provisions. Political parties disseminating linguistic hatred must be held accountable under the law. As the final protector and guardian of the Constitution, the Supreme Court must also act. The Centre should consider launching a National Linguistic Harmony Mission, preferably in coordination with the Ministry of Home Affairs or the Ministry of Culture, to monitor interstate animosity, promote mutual respect and create outlets where citizens who speak different languages can interact. The Home Ministry should issue public advisories clarifying that verbal abuse and online troll attacks based on language will be considered a crime under the BNS. In the Republic of India, no one is a second-class citizen. India's strength has never come from forcing sameness, but from embracing difference. From Kalidasa and Rabindranath Tagore to Dharamvir Bharati and Premchand, our greatest voices came from different corners, yet spoke to the same soul. India does not need a lingua franca; it needs a lingua familia, where each language is celebrated without any hierarchy. This is not just a call to protect words or languages. It is a call to protect who we are as a people. If we fail to act now, we risk the very idea of India. Sharma is assistant professor, Aryabhatta College, University of Delhi, and Kumar is advocate, Delhi High Court
News18
32 minutes ago
- News18
Parliament Gears Up For Intense Debate On Operation Sindoor And Pahlgaam Terror Attack
Parliament Gears Up For Intense Debate On Operation Sindoor And Pahlgaam Terror Attack | News18 Last Updated: India Videos | A high-stakes political showdown is brewing in Parliament as the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha together prepare for a 16-16-hour debate on Operation Sindoor and the Pahalgam terror attack n18oc_indiaNews18 Mobile App -
