The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Centre and the State of Bihar on a public interest writ petition questioning the guidelines framed by the Bihar government for implementation of the MPLAD scheme, contrary to the guidelines formulated by the Centre.
A Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave issued notice returnable in four weeks on the writ petition filed by Capt. Jai Narayan Prasad Nishad, Member of Parliament, after hearing senior counsel Jayant Bhushan and counsel Ravi Shankar Kumar challenging the guidelines of the State government dated November 10, 2011.
The petitioner said “the question that arises in the present writ petition is as to “whether the State Government is justified in framing independent guidelines contrary to those of the Central Government framed for implementation of its fully funded Government of India's Schemes under “Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme.”
He said the Principal Secretary of the Department of Planning and Development, Bihar, by an order dated November 10, 2011, had framed a new guideline for implementation of the “MPLADS” within the State of Bihar and made a separate procedure for Selection of Plan, Allocation of fund, Selection of Agency, Procedure and method for implementation, approval of Schemes etc.
He said that due to the framing of new Guidelines, the progress of implementation of the “MPLADS” for the year 2011-12 “is very poor in the State of Bihar, and till December 2012, a very minimal amount had been spent and the development works under “MPLADS” are badly affected. The public at large are on the verge of deprivation of basic amenities under the Central Government Development Schemes.”
He said “the public of the State have equal rights and opportunities for development under the Central Government's fully funded Schemes to be implemented under the “MPLADS”. For the schemes covered under the Central List, the Central Government is only empowered to frame rules for its implementation while the State Executive has no power under Rule of Executive Business to frame Guidelines.” Hence, he sought quashing of the guidelines dated November 10, 2011 by holding them as ultra vires the Constitution.
