News Headings

N E W S
I N ..D E T A I L - 2

Wednesday, July 22, 1998

weather n spotlight
today's calendar

Bedlam marks budget speech in Haryana
Tribune News Service
CHANDIGARH, July 21 — The Haryana Finance Minister, Mr Charan Dass Shorewala, today presented a tax free Budget for the year 1998-99 in the State Vidhan Sabha here.
As soon as the Finance Minister stood up to present his Budget proposals, members of the Haryana Lok Dal (R) got up to protest against certain omissions in the Budget. They continued to heckle the Finance Minister until the Speaker warned them and threatened to name them. Most of what the HLD (R) members, led by Mr Om Parkash Chautala, said was not audible in the press gallery. About 10 minutes after the start of the speech of Mr Shorewala, the HLD (R) members staged a walkout. Soon after that, the Speaker named Mr Randeep Surjewala, who kept standing to make a point in spite of the Speaker's warning. After Mr Surjewala left the House, other Congressmen also walked out.
Mr Shorewala said as per the books of the RBI, the year was likely to open with a surplus balance of Rs 35.51 crore and close with an actual deficit of Rs 48.28 crore and the deficit on the year's account of Rs 83.79 crore. This was against a surplus of Rs 109.19 crore in the revised estimate of 1997-98. This was mainly on account of the fact that the State was implementing a bigger Annual Plan of Rs 2260 crore this year which reflected an increase of 61 per cent over last year's revised Plan of Rs 1400 crore. Haryana was one of the few States having positive balance from current revenues (BCR). Hence the Budget estimates showed a positive BCR of Rs 227.19 crore for the year 1998-99.
Mr Shorewala said while the total receipts for the year were projected at Rs 14084.47 crore the total expenditure was projected at Rs 14168.26 crore.
While quicker and balanced growth of the state was his governments commitment, the Finance Minister said the major thrust areas during the year would be infrastructure development in the field of irrigation, power, roads, agriculture, education and health. The State Government, he said, would continue to provide subsidy on power, irrigation, seeds, fertiliser, weedicides and pesticides for the welfare of the agricultural community. Pension to widows, destitute women and senior citizens would also continue.
The Budget deficit, he said, was very much within manageable limits and would be covered by inherent resilience, expected buoyancy in the economy and toning up of tax administration. He expressed the hope that all development programmes envisaged in the Annual Plan would be implemented.
With the revival of excise policy, collections from state taxes would grow at 48.5 per cent to Rs 3584.13 crore in 1998-99 from Rs 2413.42 crore in 1997-98.
Throwing light on the programmes and policies of the government, the Finance Minister reported that an outlay of Rs 505 crore, which was 22.3 per cent of the total Plan outlay, had been kept for generation, transmission and distribution of power, followed by irrigation Rs 550.81 crore (24.4 per cent), including Rs 350 crore for a World Bank-aided Water Resources Consolidation Project. Transport sector including roads, bridges and transport services had been allocated an outlay of Rs 190.61 crore (8.4 per cent), out of which an amount of Rs 100 crore had been kept for Haryana highways upgradation project. Additional funds of Rs 18.44 crore were proposed to be provided for giving special thrust to the progress of two backward regions of Mewat and Shivalik areas of the state. An amount of Rs 114.38 crore had been provided for extension of social security measures like old age pension, pension to widows, destitutes and handicapped persons. A provision of Rs 221.73 crore had been made for extension of general education, technical education and vocational education. For removing gender bias against the girl child, an amount of Rs 14.74 crore had been kept for Apni Beti Apna Dhan scheme.
Mr Shorewala reported that in the Annual Plan 1998-99, an amount of Rs 739.98 crore had been earmarked for extremely aided projects, Rs 113.85 crore for basic minimum services and Rs 84.78 crore as state share on centrally sponsored schemes.
POWER SUPPLY
While reiterating the State Government's commitment to give 24 hours assured power supply to all consumers by the year 2000 and eight hours of uninterrupted supply to the agriculture sector, the Finance Minister informed that a major power restructuring and reforms programme had been undertaken. Financial support of Rs 899.75 crore had been provided for the Haryana State Electricity Board during 1998-99. He said that the agriculture sector would continue to get subsidised supply of power for which over subsidy of power Rs 700 crore was likely to be provided to the board during the course of the year out of which Rs 364 crore would be paid in cash.
The Finance Minister disclosed that the State Government had given top priority to the widening, improvement and upgradation of existing roads and construction of new roads. An amount of Rs 245.41 crore had been proposed for roads and bridges during 1998-99, out of which Rs 151.03 crore would be spent on the maintenance and upgradation of existing roads for a length of 2470 km and Rs 9438 crore for construction of new roads and bridges for a length of 130 km.
NEW SCALES
The Finance Minister informed the House that the State Government had implemented the new pay scales on the pattern of the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission as accepted by the Government of India. The government employees and pensioners had been granted the benefits of revised emoluments with effect from January 1, 1996, and cash payment had commenced from January 1 last. The arrears had been deposited in the general provident funds of the employees. A provision of Rs 1699.14 crore had been made in the Budget estimates 1998-99 as additional liability on account of revised pay scales including arrears of Rs 1101.15 crore from January 1, 1996, to December 31, 1997, ADA instalments up to 20 per cent level due up to July 1 last and bonus payment relating to the year 1996-97.
He said his government had constituted a high-powered officers' committee to recommend measures to remove anomalies in the pay scales and to consider grant of revised allowances. The recommendations of this committee were now being considered by a Cabinet sub-committee, set up under the chairmanship of the Home Minister.
The government, he said, had also constituted an officers' committee to consider the revision of pay scales of boards, corporations, cooperative institutions on the pattern of pay package approved for government employees. The recommendations of this committee were also under the consideration of the Cabinet sub-committee.

Opposition corners Jethmalani
Furore in RS over remarks on appointment of SC judges
Tribune News Service
NEW DELHI, July 21 — The Union Urban Development Minister, Mr Ram Jethmalani’s remarks over the appointment of Supreme Court judges today led to heated exchanges between the members of the Treasury Benches and the opposition in the Rajya Sabha.
The angry opposition members forced the Urban Development Minister to give a clarification regarding the comments he had made. The minister explained that he had, in no way, ‘maligned’ the judges or the judiciary.
The trouble started after the Congress member, Mr Vyalar Ravi raised the issue of Mr Jethmalani’s recent remarks on the mode of appointment of the Supreme Court judges as a special mention during the Zero Hour.
This triggered off angry outburst from the opposition members, which continued for more than an hour, on whether a minister could give out his personal opinion while being part of the government, amounting to casting aspersions on the Chief Justice of India and maligning the judiciary.
Mr Janardhan Poojari (Cong) also demanded the resignation of Mr Jethmalani for airing views which were contrary to those of the Government. The House at one time appeared to be a virtual court room with noted lawyer and Congress member, Mr Kapil Sibal crossing swords with Mr Jethmalani, also a noted jurist.
Mr Jethmalani’s reply was also frequently interrupted by the Congress and Left party members about procedural wrangles and through a spate of points of order.
Mr Jethmalani defending his statement said that the selection process for the appointment of judges was questionable as the consultation process among the five senior judges led to a deadlock hence he was advocating for the third alternative — a national judicial commission — consisting of vast sections of the society like opposition leaders, academicians, bar council representatives besides the government and the judiciary.
He pointed out that the government’s national agenda for governance had accepted the formation of a National Law Commission and only he was advocating the cause.
He also said that a member of the Cabinet was entitled to articulate his views till a collective decision had been taken. The Prime Minister alone could have objection to the views expressed by his minister and none else. He apparently was reacting to the demand made earlier for his dismissal for airing views which differed from those of the government.
The minister pointed out that whatever he had stated was on tape. There was decline in quality all round. His remarks were general in nature, he said.
Mr Jethmalani said that he had devoted his life for upholding the dignity of judiciary and it was this institution which had committed collective suicide when it accepted the supremacy of executive in 1982 abdicating its responsibility. When the consultation process was not followed and recommendations were questionable, he being a member of the legal fraternity could not keep quiet.
Earlier, Mr S.R. Bommai (Janata Dal) said one should be careful about discussing judiciary in Parliament because in no democracy in the world, judiciary was allowed to appoint and transfer judges.
Mr Pranab Mukherjee (Congress) said this was for the second time Mr Jethmalani was contradicted by the Prime Minister. Once for his views on Scheduled Caste reservation and now on the issue of powers to appoint judges.
Mr Kapil Sibal (Congress) wanted to know from the government if the rejection of the recommendations of the court was because the government felt that the persons recommended by the apex court were ‘substandard’ while Mr Gurudas Dasgupta of the CPI said Mr Jethmalani’s views were controversial and maligned judiciary. There could be no respect for law without respecting judiciary. This he alleged was done to frighten judiciary and get a ‘tailor made’ order on the temple issue.
Mr Kuldip Nayar (nominated) was of the opinion that he could not accept a situation where there was no consultation among the top five judges of the Supreme Court on appointment and transfer of judges.