14 sitting or former MLAs in Haryana are getting the pension of over Rs. 1.55 lakhs, which is the salary of a sitting MLA and the authorities find nothing wrong in it.
Pointing out the anomaly, Advocate H C Arora submitted a representation to Haryana government that in absence of upper limit on quantum of pension entitlement, some ex-MLAs in Haryana were drawing such an excessive amount of pension every month, which was much more than the aggregate of salary and allowances drawn by sitting MLAs in Haryana.
The rules state “a retired Chief Secretary can never be given pension amount which is more than the last drawn salary and allowances drawn by him as Chief Secretary. Similar is the position of a retired HC or Supreme Court Judge, or Chief Election Commissioner of India”, Arora stated.
The representation of Advocate H C Arora, has now been decided by the Haryana Chief Secretary, after the intervention of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The Haryana Chief Secretary, in his orders, rejected the contentions of Arora. The orders passed on August 29, 2016 were communicated to High Court on August 30.
Advocate H C Arora in his representation had stated that in absence of upper limit on quantum of pension entitlement, some ex-MLAs in Haryana were drawing such an excessive amount of pension every month, which was much more than the aggregate of salary and allowances drawn by sitting MLAs in Haryana.
Arora had later filed a petition in public interest in Punjab and Haryana High Court that on December 28, 2015, stating that he had submitted a representation to Haryana government seeking direction to the respondents to remove a serious anomaly in Clause 7-A (1) of the Haryana Legislative Assembly (Salary, Allowances and Pension of Members) Act, 1975.
Arora informed the High Court bench that the said representation had not been considered and decided by the said respondent.
The bench on February 10, 2016 disposed of the petition of H C Arora, with directions to respondent authorities to decide the representation expeditiously.
Later Arora approached Punjab and Haryana High Court again and filed a Contempt of Court petition. He stated that he was given personal hearing on March 25, 2016 but till date, no decision on the representation had been taken or conveyed to him.
In response to this petition, the council of Haryana government informed the high court bench that the representation of Arora had been rejected.
The bench has now disposed of the Contempt Of Court Petition holding it as having been rendered infructous and gave liberty to the Arora to challenge the order of Chief Secretary, in accordance with law.