Parliamentary secretaries: India - Revision history

Jyoti: /* Parliamentary secretaries in various states: 2016 */

2025-04-15T07:13:41Z

‎Parliamentary secretaries in various states: 2016

Jyoti: /* Parliamentary secretaries in various states */

2025-04-15T07:12:41Z

‎Parliamentary secretaries in various states

Jyoti: /* Parliamentary secretaries in various states */

2025-04-15T06:52:23Z

‎Parliamentary secretaries in various states

Jyoti: /* The office of profit issue */

2021-06-15T05:56:00Z

‎The office of profit issue

Jyoti: /* President rejects plea to disqualify 27 AAP MLAs */

2018-10-28T21:08:13Z

‎President rejects plea to disqualify 27 AAP MLAs

Jyoti: /* March 2018/ Delhi HC restores membership of 20 disqualified AAP MLAs */

2018-10-28T21:07:48Z

‎March 2018/ Delhi HC restores membership of 20 disqualified AAP MLAs

Jyoti: /* 2018: Punjab bid to shield MLAs from OoP law */

2018-07-02T12:20:59Z

‎2018: Punjab bid to shield MLAs from OoP law

Jyoti: /* The office of profit issue */

2018-07-02T12:20:06Z

‎The office of profit issue

Pdewan: /* Office of profit: issues */

2018-06-28T20:48:21Z

‎Office of profit: issues

Pdewan: /* See also */

2018-06-28T20:46:48Z

‎See also

@@ Line 109: / Line 109: @@
 TIMES NEWS NETWORK
-Finding itself in a crisis over the appointment of 21 parliamentary secretaries, AAP on Thursday submitted to the Election Commission a list of MLAs from 13 states who, it claims, are occupying offices of profit.
+Finding itself in a crisis over the appointment of 21 parliamentary secretaries, AAP submitted to the Election Commission a list of MLAs from 13 states who, it claims, are occupying offices of profit.
 Senior party member Sanjay Singh, who was part of the delegation, said: “These parliamentary secretaries have been drawing fat salaries, availing the same facilities available to ministers, and have been allocated bunga lows and staff. State governments are spending crores of rupees on these parliamentary secretaries. It's a clear case of office of profit.“
@@ Line 183: / Line 183: @@
 Haryana and Punjab: Punjab and Haryana HC set aside appointment of four MLAs as chief parliamentary secretaries in July 2017. HC had struck down appointments of 18 Punjab MLAs as CPSs by SAD-BJP government in Punjab on similar grounds. Even SC had refused to stay the order
 [[Category:India|P PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARIES: INDIA

@@ Line 90: / Line 90: @@
 Former secretary of Delhi assembly S K Sharma told TOI that Verma and Dikshit did this after taking the opposition on board and the agreement ensured that, unlike in the case of AAP, no objection was raised.. “It was mutually agreed between ruling and opposition parties during their tenures to have parliamentary secretary of chief minister and that’s why no one objected,” Sharma, an advisor to petitioner Prashant Patel who had approached the EC for disqualification of the AAP MLAs, said.
-=Parliamentary secretaries in various states=
 =Parliamentary secretaries in various states: 2016=
 [From the archives, July 1, 2016: ''The Times of India'']

@@ Line 91: / Line 91: @@
 =Parliamentary secretaries in various states=
 ==History, 1967- 2018==
 [http://www.business-standard.com/article/politics/parliamentary-secretary-was-congress-idea-aap-pays-price-bjp-s-in-a-fix-118012200783_1.html  R Krishna Das, Parliamentary secretary was Congress' idea, AAP pays price, BJP's in a fix, January 22, 2018: ''Business Standard'']
@@ Line 155: / Line 177: @@
 Haryana and Punjab: Punjab and Haryana HC set aside appointment of four MLAs as chief parliamentary secretaries in July 2017. HC had struck down appointments of 18 Punjab MLAs as CPSs by SAD-BJP government in Punjab on similar grounds. Even SC had refused to stay the order
 =Assam law of 2004 unconstitutional: SC=

@@ Line 460: / Line 460: @@
 The decision is being seen as a step to pacify disgruntled Congress MLAs by appointing them as chiefs of various state boards and corporations. Through the proposed amendment to the Act, the Cabinet has given its approval to the Congress MLAs holding new categories of offices of profit, besides those already in the Act that will not face disqualification. As per the proposed amendment, a person shall not be disqualified for being a member of the Punjab legislature for holding any of the offices of profit under the central or the state government.
 =See also=
 [[Delhi: Statehood- legal, constitutional issues]]

@@ Line 408: / Line 408: @@
 Backing its recommendation to the President for AAP MLAs’ disqualification, the poll panel had submitted that the legislators cannot claim that they were not holding office-of-profit. It had also claimed that these MLAs' pleas were not maintainable and were liable to be dismissed.
-==President rejects plea to disqualify 27 AAP MLAs==
+==2018: President rejects plea to disqualify 27 AAP MLAs==
 [https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2018%2F10%2F26&entity=Ar01902&sk=D8F4746C&mode=text  October 26, 2018: ''The Times of India'']

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:07, 28 October 2018
Line 407:		Line 407:

	Backing its recommendation to the President for AAP MLAs’ disqualification, the poll panel had submitted that the legislators cannot claim that they were not holding office-of-profit. It had also claimed that these MLAs' pleas were not maintainable and were liable to be dismissed.		Backing its recommendation to the President for AAP MLAs’ disqualification, the poll panel had submitted that the legislators cannot claim that they were not holding office-of-profit. It had also claimed that these MLAs' pleas were not maintainable and were liable to be dismissed.
		+
		+	==President rejects plea to disqualify 27 AAP MLAs==
		+	[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2018%2F10%2F26&entity=Ar01902&sk=D8F4746C&mode=text October 26, 2018: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+
		+	''Move Comes As EC Rules Posts Out Of OoP Purview''
		+
		+	A petition seeking disqualification of 27 AAP MLAs for having held “office of profit” has been dismissed by President Ram Nath Kovind after the election commission held that the posts in consideration — chairpersons of patient welfare committees — are exempted from OoP status.
		+
		+	The petition had referred to the rogi kalyan samitis constituted by Delhi government. The decision was based on an opinion tendered by the Election Commission in July, stating the said office was exempt from purview of ‘office of profit’ under provisions of the Delhi MLAs (Removal of Disqualification) Act, 1997.
		+
		+	The EC primarily relied on replies of the Delhi government on the disqualfication petition moved by one Vibhor Anand on June 21, 2016. Government of NCT of Delhi, in its submission to EC, made it clear that Rogi Kalyan Samitis were constituted by it and that their chairpersons were not entitled to any remuneration and would therefore fall under the exemption granted by item 14 of the Schedule of the Delhi MLAs (Removal of Disqualification) Act.
		+
		+	The Act provides for exemption of office of chairman, vice-chairman and members of the hospital advisory committee, Delhi, from purview of ‘office of profit”. The Delhi government informed EC that the exemption available to hospital advisory committee was also applicable to Rogi Kalyan Samiti as “the two are same thing having an organic connection”. EC also pointed out that exemption was provided for office of chairman, director or member of a statutory or nonstatutory body constituted by Delhi government. Rogi Kalyan Samiti is such a body.
		+
		+	Election Commission, in its opinion sent to the President on July 10, 2018, said that upon examining the petition as well as reply of the Delhi government on the same, it had concluded that the 27 AAP MLAs had “not incurred any disqualification under Section 15(4) of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991 for holding office of profit in view of item 14 of the Schedule of the Delhi MLAs (Removal of Disqualification) Act, 1997”.
		+
		+	The President of India, in an order dated October 15, said that having considered the matter in light of the opinion expressed by EC, “the petition dated June 21, 2016 filed by Shri Vibhor Anand on the question of alleged disqualification of Ms Alka Lamba and 26 other members of Delhi legislative assembly, is not maintainable”.
		+
		+	The order marks relief for Arvind Kejriwal government and AAP, which is also embroiled in another office-of-profit case against 20 MLAs being heard afresh by EC. The Commission had sought written submissions from the respondent MLAs in the case, which have been received as a voluminous reply running into nearly 5,000 pages.
		+
		+	The decision was based on an opinion tendered by the EC in July, stating the said office was exempt from purview of ‘office of profit’ under provisions of the Delhi MLAs (Removal of Disqualification) Act, 1997

	=The office of profit issue=		=The office of profit issue=

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 2 July 2018
Line 432:		Line 432:

	==2018: Punjab bid to shield MLAs from OoP law==		==2018: Punjab bid to shield MLAs from OoP law==
−	[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2018%2F06%2F28&entity=Ar01310&sk=E68725E6&mode=text June 27, 2018: ''The Times of India'']	+	[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2018%2F06%2F28&entity=Ar01310&sk=E68725E6&mode=text June 28, 2018: ''The Times of India'']

@@ Line 408: / Line 408: @@
 Backing its recommendation to the President for AAP MLAs’ disqualification, the poll panel had submitted that the legislators cannot claim that they were not holding office-of-profit. It had also claimed that these MLAs' pleas were not maintainable and were liable to be dismissed.
-=Office of profit: issues=
+=The office of profit issue=
 ==Office of profit tripped Sonia, Jaya too==
 [https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2018%2F01%2F20&entity=Ar00312&sk=5A8506C2&mode=text  Bharti.Jain, January 20, 2018: ''The Times of India'']