M A I N   N E W S

MPLAD scheme valid, rules apex court
R Sedhuraman/Legal Correspondent

What’s the scheme? Under the MPs Local Area Development plan, each MP gets Rs 2 cr a year for developmental works in his constituency. Who challenged it? J-K Panthers Party chief Bhim Singh challenged the scheme through a PIL in 1999, alleging misuse of funds. The judgment: The scheme does not result in an unfair advantage to sitting MPs.

New Delhi, May 6
In an unanimous verdict, a five-member Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court today upheld the validity of the MPs Local Area Development (MPLAD) scheme, under which each MP gets Rs 2 crore a year, on as many as 10 grounds.

The scheme “does not amount to a corrupt practice” and “does not result in an unfair advantage to the sitting Members of Parliament” over other candidates contesting against them in the Lok Sabha elections, the Bench, headed by Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan, ruled.

The Bench, which included Justices RV Raveendran, DK Jain, P Sathasivam and JM Panchal, endorsed the scheme in terms of constitutional provisions, viability, accountability, perceived encroachment upon the role of municipalities and panchayats, welfare development, public purpose and the quasi-federal nature of the Constitution.

“We hold that the impugned MPLAD scheme is valid and intra vires of the Constitution and all the writ petitions as well as the transferred cases are liable to be dismissed as devoid of any merit. Consequently, the same are dismissed,” the Bench held.

The scheme was announced on December 23, 1993, during the tenure of Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao. The aim was to enable the MPs to identify small works for creation of durable community assets based on locally-felt needs in their constituencies. Such assets were also categorised as national priorities to meet the demand for drinking water, primary education, public health, sanitation and roads.

The scheme was launched in 1993-94 with each MP entitled to get Rs 5 lakh a year. Subsequently, the allocation was raised to Rs 1 crore in 1994-95 and to Rs 2 crore from 1998-99.

Alleging misuse of funds, Jammu and Kashmir Panthers Party chief Bhim Singh challenged the scheme through a PIL in 1999. Later, similar petitions were clubbed with this PIL. If development prompted people to vote for the incumbent candidate, “it certainly does not violate any principle of free and fair elections,” the apex court ruled.

On allegations of corruption, the Bench said the scheme had checks and balances in place. And on viability, the court said it could strike down a law or scheme only on the basis of its vires or unconstitutionality but not on the basis of its viability.