LOK PRAHARI THR. ITS GNRL. SECY, S N SHUKLA versus STATE OF UP AND ORS

Citation: [2016] 8 S.C.R. 363 · Decided: 21-11-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

[2016] 8 S.C.R. 363 
LOK PRAHARI THR. ITS GNRL. SECY, S N SHUKLA 
A 
v. 
STATE OF UP AND ORS 
(Civil Appeal No. 11004of2016) 
NOVEMBER21, 2016 
[T.S. THAKUR, CJI, A.M. KHANWILKAR AND 
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.] 
Vidhayak Nidhi scheme - Constitutional Validity of -
Introduction of Scheme ll'hich provided for annual budgetary grants 
to Members of Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council of the 
State of U.P. -
For facilitating development work in their 
constituencies - Validity of challenged by filing writ petition - In 
the alternative prayed that the money allocated under the Scheme 
to be utilized only for meeting the expenditure on schemes which 
are sanctioned under the district plans pursuant to the provisions 
u/Art. 243ZD of the Constitution and the U.P. District Planning 
Com111ittee Act, 1999 - High Court relying on Bhim Singh's case 
[wherein '1\1embers of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme' 
(MPLAD) was held to be constitutional~v valid] held the Vidhayak 
Nidhi Scheme as constitutionally valid - Holl'cve1; as regards the 
allegations 'lack of accountability' and 'misuse of funds', High 
Court granted liberty to the petitioners lo give representation to 
Government after formulating their suggestions - Pursuant to the 
representation, orders were passed by the Rural Development 
Department and the Department of Planning of the State - On 
appeal, held: The Vidhayak Nidhi Scheme does not per se violate 
Art. 2../JZD or the U.P. District Planning Com111ittee Act, 1999 -
However, the guidelines formulated by the State Government are 
not in conformity with the Jpirit and underlying purpose of Parts 
IX and IXA of the Constitution in terms as held in Bhim Singh's case 
- Direction to State to include certain safeguards which form a part 
of MP LAD Scheme - Constitution of India - Parts IX and IXA, Art. 
243ZD - Uttar Pradesh District Planning Committee Act, 1999. 
In the State ofUttar Pradesh a scheme known as 'Vidhayak Nidhi 
Scheme' was introduced in the State-Budget 1998-1999, with an 
allocation of Rs. Fifty lakhs for every member of the Legislative Assembly 
363 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
364 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 8 S.C.R. 
and Legislative Council for facilitating the development work in their 
constituencies. The appellant filed writ petition before High Court, 
challenging the legality of the Scheme. In the alternative, the appellant 
prayed that the money allocated under the Scheme should be utilized 
only for meeting the expenditure on the schemes which are sanctioned 
under the District plans pursuant to the provisions u/ Art. 243ZD of the 
Constitution and U.P. District Planning Committee Act, 1999. 
During penedency of the petition, MPLADS 'Members of 
Parliament Local Area Development Scheme' (which was introduced 
in the year 1993, providing for annual budgetary grants by the Union 
Government to enable Members of Parliament to recommend work of a 
developmental nature in their constitutencies) was held as constitutionally 
valid by Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in Bhim Singh vs. Union 
of India 2010 (6) SCR 218. 
The High Court relying upon the judgment in Bhim Singh case 
and holding that both the central and the State Schemes were similar, 
dismissed the writ petition. However, the High Court, dealing with the 
allegation as to 'lack of accountability' and 'misuse of funds', granted 
liberty to the appellant to formulate its suggestions for consideration of 
the same by the departments concerned of the State Government. Present 
appeal was filed against the order of the High Court. 
On the representation filed by the appellant giving his suggestions, 
Rural Department and the Planning Department of the State passed 
orders. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. The Vidhayak Nidhi Scheme does not per se 
violate Article 243ZD or the U P District Planning Committee 
Act, 1999. Elected representatives have a vital role in democracy. 
They have an intrinsic connection with their constituencies and 
have a legitimate role to discharge in meeting the development 
needs of their constituencies. Article 243ZD does not exclude 
their role. On the contrary, they perform a supplemental role by 
enhancing and supporting the work of the institutions of local 
self-governance. [Para 21] [379-E-F] 
2. However, the State Government ought to have applied 
its mind to the crucial aspects which distinguish MPLADS 
LOK PRAHARI THR. ITS GNRL. SECY, SN SHUKLA v. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.