Supreme Court Seeks UP Govt’s Response On Plea Challenging Pension To Former MLAs, MLCs

The Supreme Court has sought response from the Uttar Pradesh government and other respondents regarding the validity of statutory provisions granting pensions and other facilities to state legislators. A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta agreed to hear the petition, which challenged a verdict by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in May this year. 

The petition targets certain specific provisions of the Uttar Pradesh State Legislature (Members’ Emoluments and Pension) Act, 1980, under which pension benefits and various other amenities are provided to both the sitting and former Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) and Members of the Legislative Council (MLCs). As the apex court agreed to hear the challenges against the high court’s decision, it issued notice to the state and posted the case for hearing after four weeks.

The petition was filed by ‘Lok Prahari’, a non-governmental organisation (NGO), initially with the high court, contesting the validity of the 1980 Act. The high court noted that the challenged provision under the Act granted a wide range of salaries, allowances, and other facilities to the sitting and former MLAs and MLCs. Beyond direct compensation to lawmakers, the provision also extended pension, family pension, free travel, medical facilities, and other amenities to their spouses and family members. Challenging this statutory arrangement, the petitioner argued that the state legislature had in effect made itself the “judge in its own cause”, according to a PTI report. 

The petitioner submitted that the legislature was granting benefits to former members in a manner that was “manifestly arbitrary” and contrary to the fundamental constitutional idea that a public office was meant for public service rather than personal gain.

The petitioner pointed to Article 195 of the Constitution of India and its interpretation. The core grievance was that the provision of the 1980 Act has an impact far beyond the limited power conferred by Article 195. This Article deals specifically with salaries and allowances of MLAs and MLCs of a state. 

The petitioner highlighted that Article 195 mentioned only ‘salary and allowances’ to the ‘members’, and made no mention of pension, post-retirement benefits, and other facilities to be extended to family members or companions.

Notably, the Allahabad High Court had observed that the provisions under the Act were rooted in policy agreement rather than a constitutional infirmity. The high court concluded that the Constitutional scheme did not restrain the state legislature from enacting provisions related to pension, allowances, or other benefits to its members, including former members.

The matter now rests with the Supreme Court, and the next hearing will be in four weeks.