MILAP CHAND DANDIA Vs. STATE OF RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "A republic, if you can keep it." - Benjamin Franklin, after the Constitutional Convention resolved to adopt a republican form of government in the USA. In this petition filed in public interest, a challenge has been laid to the constitutionality of Section 7BB and Section 11 of the Rajasthan Ministers Salaries Act, 2017, which provide that former Chief Ministers shall get for the remainder of their lives, a government residence, a car for their family members, telephone and a staff of 10 persons including a driver.

(2.) The public interest litigant submits that Articles 164(5), 195 and Entries 38 and 40 of List II of the Constitution of India provide only for payment of salary and allowances to the members of legislatures or to the ministers. There is no specific provision for residence and conveyance allowance for them in these provisions. Therefore, former Chief Ministers are not entitled to a government residence, or a residence at public expense, or a car for their family members, telephone and staff of ten including a driver.

(3.) It is submitted that being financially backward, the State of Rajasthan cannot afford to provide the facilities assured by the Act to former Chief Ministers. It is argued that if such facilities are allowed, they would be an extra burden on the state exchequer. There is no rationale for providing of staffers to the ex-Chief Ministers. The petitioners allege that after demitting office, a Chief Minister becomes a common man and thus it would be violative of the provisions of Article 14 to provide the said facilities to a former Chief Minister.