Virtually giving a clean chit to the Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government, Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil on Friday rejected the opposition demand for imposition of president’s rule in West Bengal.

Mr Patil said, if a few villages were affected, it could not imply that law and order in the entire state had broken down and president’s rule had to be imposed.

“We will be very careful in using Article 356. We should not use it lightly or in a manner that is suspicious and unacceptable,” Mr Patil added. He supported the CPM leaders’ claim that violence in Nandigram was unleashed by “outside forces.” However, he evaded a direct reply on whether Maoists were actually present in the village. He said it was not “written on the shirts of the problem-creators” whether they were members of Maoist, Naxal or any other groups.

During the debate, the opposition attacked the Left Front government and sought its dismissal.

Patil, however, stated that Article 356 would be used only if it was absolutely necessary. The government would be very careful.

He said, “If president’s rule is imposed in one state, the opposition parties cannot say this should not be done in some other states.”

At the same time, the home minister said the Centre could give directives to states or send advisories. This would not mean that it would automatically lead to invocation of Article 356.

In his hour-long reply, marked by frequent interruptions, Patil ducked questions whether the Left Front Government took the right approach by using force against the protestors. The major task before the authorities was to ensure early return of the affected people who had fled the villages and protection of  their lives and properties.

He also stated that affected people had to be adequately compensated and legal action taken against those who tried to capitalise upon such unfortunate incidents.

“I hope that the West Bengal government will not be found wanting in taking appropriate action,” he said.