Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. The impugned circular was preceded by two circulars dated March 24 & 28, 2020. It would be appropriate to note what was provided by these circulars before we take note of the impugned circular.

3. On March 24, 2020, the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MPLADS Division), had issued a circular on the subject of one-time dispensation under the Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (hereafter the "MPLAD Scheme", for short) for purchase of testing, screening and other facilities in connection with COVID-19. Such circular was issued based on requests received from Hon'ble Members of Parliament (hereafter "the MPs", for short) for including facilities for medical testing and screening under the MPLAD Scheme in order to bolster the ongoing fght against pandemic caused by COVID-19. In such context, the Ministry decided that the District Authority may utilize MPLAD Scheme funds on medical testing, screening and other facilities required to detect and contain COVID-19 and that it had been decided to grant one-time dispensation under the MPLAD Scheme for purchase/installation of the items mentioned therein by PIL-92550.2020.doc relaxing the guidelines in the manner suggested and following the procedure detailed therein. Such circular was stated to have been issued with the approval of the Competent Authority.

9. Having noted the rival contentions, we proceed to trace the genesis of the MPLAD Scheme. An announcement was made by the Prime Minister on December 23, 1993 introducing it for the frst-time during FY 1993-94. Considering that the general public approach the MPs for providing certain facilities to meet the felt needs of the people, the objective of the MPLAD Scheme has been to enable the MPs to recommend work of developmental nature with emphasis on the creation of durable community assets based on the locally felt needs to be taken up in their respective constituencies. Right from the inception of the MPLAD Scheme, durable assets of national priorities, viz. drinking water, primary education, public health, sanitation and roads, etc., are being created. At the launch of the MPLAD Scheme, each MP was allotted Rs.5 (fve) lakh which was increased to Rs.1 (one) crore from FY 1994-95. A further increase followed from FY 1998-99 upto Rs.2 (two) crore and from 2011-12, Rs.5 (fve) crore in each fnancial year is PIL-92550.2020.doc available for utilization by each MP. The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation is responsible for policy formulation, release of funds and prescribing monetary mechanism for implementation of the MPLAD Scheme. A department in each State/Union Territory is designated as a Nodal Department with overall responsibilities of supervision, monitoring and coordination with the districts and other departments for proper implementation of the MPLAD Scheme.

10. The funds made available for utilization from the MPLAD Scheme are provided by the Government of India and Article 282 of the Constitution of India, among others, seems to be the source of power in this behalf.

11. According to Shri Jagtap, learned advocate for the petitioner, the MPLAD Scheme is meant to decentralize funds and to develop local areas directly through district nodal ofcers. Given the laudable purpose it seeks to achieve, suspension of the MPLAD Scheme is not in the best interest of the electorate of the constituencies from which the MPs are elected and being prejudicial and harmful to public interest, the Court ought to intervene to set things right. It PIL-92550.2020.doc has been contended that this Court has been approached by the petitioner for implementation of the Constitutional rights of the electorate to have the beneft of the MPLAD Scheme funds, which could have been utilized for efective mitigation of COVID-19 pandemic at its grass root level.

18. In our view, the decision of the concerned ministry to suspend the MPLAD Scheme would adversely afect the PIL-92550.2020.doc MPs because such suspension obviously entails suspension of developmental works in their respective constituency. Any MP could have approached the Court, if he/she were aggrieved by the suspension of the MPLAD Scheme. Despite the deleterious efects suspension on release of funds under the MPLAD Scheme could have on the prospects of an MP to be elected in future, not a single MP ~ be it of the party in power or in the opposition ~ has questioned such suspension because, without any discrimination, the MPLAD Scheme funds were proposed to be placed by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation before the Ministry of Finance to meet the challenges posed by the pandemic. Irrespective of whichever party an MP belongs, the suspension has cut across all similarly; yet, none has come forward to say that by reason of the suspension, there has been an injury or wrong prejudicial to the interests of the electorate he represents. On the contrary, one would fnd from the circular dated March 24, 2020 that the MPs desired that the MPLAD Scheme funds are utilized for purchasing equipment for tackling COVID-19. Next in line of being afected is the electorate. Not a single citizen has come up PIL-92550.2020.doc with a grievance that the MPLAD Scheme funds should not be utilized to combat COVID-19. If indeed the decision of the concerned ministry were not intended to serve any public good, any member of the public irrespective of his fnancial status as a potential benefciary of developmental works carried on with the MPLAD Scheme funds could have espoused a grievance. It is not that the MPs in their individual capacity are disabled from pursuing remedies provided by law to have any spanner in the developmental works they recommended removed; nor are all members of the electorate across the country disabled from pursuing remedy provided by law to have release of such funds restored. It is only the petitioner who has come forward to question the suspension, for reasons best known to her. Had the petitioner espoused a cause of genuine public interest, the Court would not have sat back and declined interference. However, in an unprecedented situation such as the pandemic, when the Central Government and the State Governments are exploring all avenues to secure the best of health conditions for the citizens of the country and to make both ends meet, the endeavour of the petitioner to have the PIL-92550.2020.doc initiative taken to utilize the MPLAD Scheme funds to sponsor health and medical care related projects scuttled, has to be nipped in the bud.