Sudershan Reddy and Justice P. Sathasivam, concluded the hearing of the issue in half an hour.

'There is a difference between adjourning the proceedings of the house and to prorogue the house,' the bench said, adding that only when the house is prorogued, parliament takes the assent from the president to commence proceedings.

When the house is merely adjourned, the speaker himself or herself issues notices to the members to start the session again, the bench added.

Attorney General G.E. Vahanvati sought dismissal of the matter saying that the lawsuit had no merit. He said the speaker had decided the issue in 2004 itself.

He termed as 'absurd' the RPI-A leader's contention that the first meeting of the house each year should be treated as the first session of every year.

But, Athawale's counsel H.K. Puri said Article 87 of the constitution says that the first session of the house each year has to be addressed by the president and the expressions of the Article needs to be given a meaning.