|
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court Wednesday issued
notice to the central government on a plea seeking direction that
MPs not be allowed reimbursement of their travel expenses more
than the actual amount they have spent.
A division bench of Chief Justice D. Murugesan and Justice Rajiv
Sahai Endlaw asked the central government to explain "why extra
allowances are allowed to MPs".
Seeking response from the central government, Lok Sabha and Rajya
Sabha Secretariat and ministry of law and justice, the court
posted the matter for Jan 23, 2013.
The PIL was filed by B.N.P Singh, a retired wing commander and
general secretary of civil society group Veteran's Forum for
Transparency in Public Life. Singh challenged some provisions of
salary and allowances available to MPs.
The PIL sought direction to "quash some provisions of the salary,
allowances, pension of Members of Parliament Act, 1954 and the
rules made thereunder in this regard as being unconstitutional and
ultra vires to the constitution of India".
The action on the part of the government allowing the MPs to seek
reimbursement of more money than they actually spent (Rs.1.25 or
more is reimbursed on Re.1 spent) on their travel expenses was
"most illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory", said advocate Sitab
Ali Chaudhary appearing for the petitioner.
The plea claimed that even the judges of the Supreme Court and
high courts are allowed reimbursement of only the actual expenses
incurred by them on their travel and not in the ratio as MPs are
getting.
Allowing the MPs to get more money than they actually spent is in
gross violation of the legal and fundamental rights of the
citizens of India which is also violation of principles of
"transparency and accountability" and the principles of
"performance with efficiency without corruption" in public life,
the plea said.
The petition sought directions from central government to audit TA
and DA of the MPs of both the houses by the Comptroller and
Auditor General (CAG).
"The petition is being filed challenging the constitutional
validity as unconstitutional and ultra vires to the constitution
India Section 4 (1)(a), 4 (1)(b) & 4 (1)(c) of the Salary,
Allowances and Pension of Members of Parliament Act, 1954 and the
rules made thereunder whereby the members of the parliament are
allowed to reimburse more than the actual amount spent on their
journey and putting the unnecessary and unjust burden on the
exchequer as well as on the tax payers beside being the most
illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory," it said.
The plea further stated that apart from the reimbursement of
TA/DA, the MPs are also getting their monthly salaries, daily
allowances, office expenses, free telephone and electricity, water
bills etc. Therefore they should not be allowed to get more amount
of money than the amount of money they actually spent in any
manner.
There is a casual and vague approach by granting reimbursement of
the travel expenses claimed by the MPs without any cross-checking
and tax-payers' money is being misused, said the public interest
litigation (PIL).
|
Comments
|
Quick links