PUDUCHERRY: Puducherry Chief Minister V Narayanasamy on Monday presented a Rs 9000 crore tax free budget for the financial year 2020-2021 in the assembly amidst objections from Lt Governor Kiran Bedi and without her customary address, as well as a walkout by the entire opposition comprising the All India NR Congress (AINRC), AIADMK and BJP members in her support.
The budget is Rs 575 crore more than the previous year’s outlay of Rs 8,425 crore and Rs 1073 crore more than the revised budget outlay of Rs 7927 crore in 2019-2020.
Presenting the budget in a three-hour address comprising 150 pages, the Chief Minister who also holds the finance portfolio said Rs 5257 crore (59 percent) of the budget is from the state’s own resources, Rs 2023 crore (22 percent) from central assistance and centrally sponsored schemes and the balance Rs 1710 crore (19 percent) will be from open market borrowings and negotiated loans from central financial institutions (NABARD, HUDCO and others).
The major expenditure would be Rs 1966 crores for salaries (21.84 percent), Rs 1177 crores for pension (13.07 percent), Rs 1625 crores for repayment of loans and interest (18.06 percent) and Rs 1525 crores for power purchase (16.94 percent). Besides, Rs 896 crores has been earmarked for the old age pension scheme and Rs 864 crores for grants to educational institutions, public sector undertakings and cooperative institutions, he said.
The budget was presented after the Speaker of the territorial assembly V P Sivakozhunthu cancelled the customary address of the Lt Governor following the adoption of a resolution in the house after she did not turn up to deliver it. The speaker in his ruling said that as the Lt Governor failed to turn up, he has cancelled her address under section 309 of the business rules after a resolution was adopted in the house dispensing with it.
Late on Sunday evening, Bedi wrote to the Chief Minister conveying her decision to give a fresh date for delivering the Lt Governor’s address and the presentation of the budget for the year 2020-2021, citing that the Chief Minister V Narayanasamy had not sent her the Annual Financial Statement (AFS) and demand for grants for approval. She said it was required under section 27 and 28 of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963.
However, the Chief Minister in his reply to the Lt Governor, contended that the approval of the Lt Governor for AFS was not required after it was duly approved by the President and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and sent with the approval of the Lt Governor to the MHA. As per section 28(3) of the Union Territories Act, 1963, the recommendation of the administrator (LG) for laying demand for grants will be sought after the date is fixed by the Business Advisory Committee, said the Chief Minister.
Bedi however, maintained that what Chief Minister Narayanasamy was doing was totally “illegal and irregular”. The Chief Minister has not forwarded the AFS file approved by the president to the Lt.Governor. “How do I lay it before the legislative assembly when I have not even seen the budget,” she said.
Rule 28(3) says that no demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the administrator. “So where is the financial statement which has all grants?”, she asked. “Without firming up the demand for grants, the question of presenting the budget does not arise. Only after getting approval under Section 28(3) of the UT act can the budget be presented," she said.
The Chief Minister noted that the AFS is submitted under Section 27 of the UT Act, 1963. The introduction of the demand for grants in the Assembly under Section 28(3) will arise only after the completion of the provisions of estimates after the AFS is submitted under Section 27 of the Union Territories Act 1963 (in the Assembly).
Bedi cautioned that if the Chief Minister continues to hold back the budget file, then expenses, pensions and salaries will be affected and the blame should not be put on her or the government of India but would be entirely on him.
In light of the contradictory stance between the two constitutional authorities, it remains to be seen what the future will hold for the people of Puducherry.