बिना बजट प्रावधान और विस की मंजूरी के खर्च की गई थी यह राशि
नवीन जोशी
भोपाल।
प्रदेश में दूसरी पारी खेल रही शिवराज सरकार पूर्ववर्ती दिग्विजय सिंह सरकार के प्रति कितनी नरम एवं दरियादिल है यह उसके द्वारा दिग्गी शासनकाल के चार वित्तीय वर्षों में बिना बजट प्रावधान एवं विधानसभा की मंजूरी के खर्च हुई करीब साढ़े उन्नीस अरब रुपये की राशि की अब भरपाई करना है। इसके लिये विधानसभा के गत शीतकालीन सत्र में चार विनियोग विधेयक लाये गये और उन्हें सर्वसम्मति से मंजूर किया गया और अब राज्यपाल रामनरेश यादव ने इन विधेयकों को मंजूर कर उक्त अधिक व्यय को कानूनी अमलीजामा पहनाकर इस भारी भरकम राशि की भरपाई में सहयोग कर दिया है।
प्रदेश में दिग्विजय सिंह शासनकाल वर्ष 1993 से 2003 तक रहा है। इस बीच चार वित्तीय वर्ष ऐसे रहे जिनमें तत्कालीन सरकार ने बिना बजट प्रावधान एवं विधानसभा की पूर्व मंजूरी के राज्य की संचित निधि से अधिक व्यय कर दिया। महालेखापरीक्षक के सामने राज्य के वित्तीय लेखों को विधिसम्मत करने के लिये इन आधिक्यों की भरपाई करना जरुरी होता है। वर्ष 1994 में तत्कालीन कांग्रेस सरकार ने सोलह विभागों गृह, राजस्व, पशुपालन, मछली पालन, पीएचई, लोनिवि, स्कूल शिक्षा, विधि, पंचायत, उच्च शिक्षा, जल संसाधन, अनुसूचित जाति कल्याण, धार्मिक न्यास एवं धर्मस्व, प्राकृतिक आपदा, तकनीकी तथा आवास एवं पर्यावरण में 258 करोड़ 11 लाख 34 हजार 866 रुपये अधिक खर्च कर दिये। वर्ष 1995 में तत्कालीन कांग्रेस सरकार ने दस विभागों वित्त, पीएचई, राजस्व, पंचायत, जनसम्पर्क, लोनिवि, तकनीकी, योजना, आवास एवं पर्यावरण तथा प्राकृतिक आपदा में 407 करोड़ 45 लाख 82 हजार 953 रुपये अधिक खर्च कर दिये। इसी प्रकार, वर्ष 1999 में तत्कालीन कांग्रेस सरकार ने 14 विभागों में 1276 करोड़ 35 लाख 60 हजार 917 रुपये अधिक व्यय कर दिये। जबकि इसी तत्कालीन सरकार ने फिर वर्ष 2002 में तीन विभागों वित्त, पीएचई और जलसंसाधन में 6 करोड़ 25 लाख 60 हजार 594 रुपये ज्यादा खर्च कर दिये।
इन चारों वित्तीय वर्ष में तत्कालीन राज्य सरकार द्वारा विधानसभा द्वारा दिये गये अनुदान से अधिक व्यय किया गया जिनकी अब नौ साल बाद प्रतिपूर्ति वर्तमान भाजपा सरकार ने कानूनी प्रावधान लाकर कर दी है।
इसके लिये राज्य के वित्त मंत्री राघवजी भाई ने विधानसभा के शीतकालीन सत्र में 25 नवम्बर,2011 को इन चार सालों के अधिक व्यय के विवरण पेश किये थे और फिर हर वित्तीय वर्ष के चार विनियोग विधेयक लाकर इन्हें सदन में बिना कोई आपत्ति के मंजूर कराया था। अब राज्य के खजाने से किये गये इन अधिक व्ययों की प्रतिपूर्ति हो गई है और इन्हें कानूनी सहमति मिल गई है।
Pakistani Barbarism At The Border
ReplyDeleteSinister cross-border head-hunting raids are a Pakistani calling card
Indian soldiers carry the coffin of Lance Naik Hemraj."You don't need a machete. Once a soldier is shot dead, a boot is placed on his head and a combat knife is used to hack the head off. Watch the video of Daniel Pearl's execution (the kidnapped Wall Street Journal reporter decapitated by militants in Karachi in 2001)." It's a cold, clinical explanation from an Indian Army officer of how Pakistani soldiers may have decapitated two Indian soldiers they killed in a January 8 raid in Poonch, 80 km south west of state capital Srinagar. It's the most serious violation of the September 2003 ceasefire signed by Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pervez Musharraf. Both sides agreed to end the frequent artillery and machine gun duels along the 740 kmLine of Control (LoC).India blames the Pakistani army for the attacks, and lists 120 ceasefire violations in 2012, among the highest since the 2003 agreement. It says Pakistanis fire to cover infiltration by militants across the LoC before snow sets in. The guns haven't fallen silent. The knives haven't been sheathed either.Barbaric cross-border head-hunting raids, where soldiers are killed and heads brought back as trophies, are a Pakistani calling card. Such sneak attacks have till now been kept a secret by the Indian Army that has masked them through outright denials or attributed the deaths to border firefights. On January 8, this shadow war spilled out into the open when Pakistani troops from the Baloch regiment crossed the LoC in the Poonch sector and killedLance Naik Hemraj and Lance Naik Sudhakar Singhof the Rajputana Rifles. Both soldiers were decapitated and one head carried across the border. Indian soldiers carry the coffin of Lance Naik Hemraj. A spokesman of the Army's Northern Command said the soldiers had "laid down their lives" to fight back a Pakistani intrusion. A senior Army official in New Delhi, too, said the bodies had been "mutilated", but admitted in private that they had been decapitated. Defence Minister A.K. Antony called the incident "highly provocative", even as Shiv Sena demanded his resignation. The Pakistan foreign office termed the charges as "baseless and unfounded allegations". "Pakistan is prepared to hold probes through United Nations Military Observer Group for India and Pakistan on the recent ceasefire violations on the LoC," the statement added. Click here to Enlarge
The same day, Pakistan's foreign ministry in Islamabad summoned the Indian deputy high commissioner to lodge a protest over an "unprovoked attack" by Indian forces on a Pakistani post that killed one soldier and wounded another. The implication was, the beheading was a Pakistani retaliation. Lance Naik Sudhakar Singh But more worrying are raids by Pakistani Special Services Group (SSH) commandos organised into Border Action Teams (BATS)-dedicated forces tasked with crossing the LoC and killing Indian soldiers. The acronym is an Indian Army coinage and indicative of how frequent the raids are. BAT raids, say Army officials, are not impulsive, but come after careful reconnaissance of vulnerable spots along the LoC. Fidayeen attacks and cross-border head-hunting raids began after the Kargil War, which had its share of barbarity. A six-man patrol led by Captain Saurabh Kalia was captured by Pakistani soldiers in the Kaksar sector. Kalia and his men were tortured for 22 days, executed, and their mutilated bodies handed back to the Indian Army. Lance Naik Hemraj.
In February 2000, seven months after the Kargil War, the Indian Army came face to face with this new brutality. A Pakistani BAT ambushed and killed seven Indian soldiers in Nowshera in Rajouri district. The Army was shocked to discover the headless body of a soldier. The inquiry into the incident omitted mention of the headless corpse of Sepoy Bhausaheb Talekar. Subsequent interrogation of a captured militant revealed that the head of the soldier was brandished as a trophy in Pakistan. The militant, who claimed he was part of the raid, said they had played football with the soldier's head. Pakistani scribe Hamid Mir wrote that the raid was led by Ilyas Kashmiri, a former SSG commando who later headed huji's 313 Brigade. Kashmiri was killed in a 2011 US drone strike. The 2003 ceasefire brought a lull in such incidents, but head-hunting raids are believed to have continued. In July 2011, Indian Army hushed up the brutal killing of Havildar Jaipal Singh Adhikari and Lance Naik Devender Singh of the Rajput regiment in Kupwara district. Their bodies were sent to their families in Uttarakhand in sealed caskets as they were "badly mutilated", and cremated as such. Their deaths were attributed to a firefight with militants along the border. Last August, a story began doing the rounds in the Indian Army messes. Officers whispered of a ferocious cross-border raid by Indian troops in J&K that killed several Pakistani soldiers. The story goes that it was retaliation for the July 2011 beheadings. The Indian Army flatly denies the July 2011 incident or any retaliation to it. No reports from Pakistan suggest that the incident had occurred. Army officials say beheadings-an ancient wartime tactic-terrorise troops and are used to collect war trophies and wage psychological warfare. Pakistani Taliban uses video-graphed beheadings against Pakistani army in Waziristan. Last June, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan released a video that showed 17 decapitated Pakistani soldiers. Pakistan army's beheadings have now turned the spotlight on Pakistan's sincerity towards the peace process. More so because the Indian Army decided to make the incident public. A senior Army official says the Army confirmed the incident as it had become increasingly difficult to conceal mutilated bodies from families. Indian army soldiers patrol outside their camp at Gurez in Kashmir.
ReplyDelete"Pakistan army and civilian administration are not in sync with each other," says Lt-General B.S. Jaswal, former Northern Army commander. The Army has turned down suggestions of approaching the International Court of Justice over the beheadings, as it says this would amount to third-party mediation in J&K, something Pakistan favours. The Indian Government appears unwilling to escalate the incident. "Whatever has happened should not be escalated. We can't and mustn't allow an escalation of a very unwholesome event that has taken place," Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid told a press conference. But there are indications an Indian retaliation is in the offing. "Not here, not now, but at a time and place of our choosing," a senior Army offic
8. When the Government realised the inadvisability of such as exercise, its valid reservations on the manner in which Anna Hazare and his advisers were seeking to monopolise the national debate though they had no national following were sought to be misrepresented by Anna and his advisers as reflecting the Government’s unwillingness to create a powerful and independent machinery. Differences on important individual issues such as whether the proposed Lok Pal should have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute the Prime Minister and members of the judiciary too have been sought to be misrepresented as additional arguments reflecting the Government’s opposition to the creation of a Lok Pal.
ReplyDelete9.Non-governmental bodies act as advisers on policy-making. It ought to be left to the Government to decide which advice will be followed and which will be rejected. The Government has the right to reject or modify for valid and cogent reasons.It is so in all democracies.
10.Since independence, we have had dozens of non-Governmental groups----some permanent, some temporary--- which had advised various Governments on what policies should be followed. The Government did not always accept all their advice, even if it was given unanimously.
11. For the first time in our history, we have created a non-Governmental group which is trying to dictate policy to the Government. When any of its advice is rejected, it is threatening to take the issue again to the streets in order to force the Government to accept it. Anna Hazare has put the Government on notice that he would go on fast again from August 15 if a solution satisfactory to his group is not found.
12.No Government worth its salt can let itself be dictated by a segment of non-Governmental opinion. The Government has to reject firmly, but politely the pretensions of Anna and his team to be the custodian of the morals of our society as a whole. They have to have an important role in policy-formulation on anti-corruption issues, but as advisers with a restricted mandate and not as non-governmental dictators with a self-assumed, unrestricted mandate.
13. The Government has done well to initiate an exercise for consultations with the other political parties to reach a national consensus. It is incumbent on the other political polities to respond positively to the Government’s initiative. Any attempt to take advantage of the Government’s self-created difficulties will be short-sighted and could weaken democracy in the long-term.
14. Even while initiating this exercise, the Government should not burn its bridges with the Hazare team. It should try to give the new exercise a larger format by bringing in other non-governmental segments while not diluting the primacy of the Anna Hazare group.It should play the role of the first among equals, but not as the sole arbiter of the national debate on the Lok Pal issue.
15. The unfortunate rhetoric emanating from individual Ministers of the Government as well as from individual leaders of the Congress (I) should be lowered in order not to add to the heat and bitterness of the debate. There is a need for deft handling and political delicatesse which could come only from the Prime Minister and from no one else. It is time for him to take the debate to the people through the media as well as through direct interactions with the people during tours across the country.
16. If these steps are not taken, there could be a danger of the debate getting out of hand and leading to unpredictable consequences.
3. His fast and the surprising public response to it made the Government realise belatedly that it can no longer drag its feet on the demand for setting up such a machinery as successive Governments have been doing for nearly 50 years. A government rattled by the extent of the public response to the fast swung from one extreme of inaction to the other extreme of a series of ill-advised actions as a result of which the moral authority to steer the anti-corruption movement has slipped from the hands of the Government into the hands of some civil society activists headed by Anna Hazare.
ReplyDelete4. The Government let itself be stampeded by the increasing public anger on the issue of corruption into recognising the questionable credentials of Anna Hazare and his close advisers as representatives of the civil society as a whole.They did not represent the civil society. They represented strong segments of non-governmental opinion which demanded immediate action on the Lok Pal issue.
5. There are many dimensions to the movement for the creation of a powerful and independent Jan Lok Pal such as the procedure for its constitution, its powers to investigate and prosecute the corrupt and its jurisdiction. Civil society in any democracy is not monolithic. Nor is the world of non-governmental opinion. There is always a plurality of centres of non-governmental initiatives, leadership and ideas.
6. A confused Government reacted to the growing public support to the movement headed by Anna Hazare in a manner that made the civil society appear to be monolithic and conferred on Anna and his small circle of advisers the right to speak exclusively on behalf of the entire non-Governmental society. The existence of a plurality of centres of opinion was lost sight of in the panic response to the growing public support for Anna’s fast. This plurality of centres existed not only in the non-governmental segment having no formal role in policy-formulation, but also in that segment, which was not governmental, but had a role in policy formulation in the form of different political parties and their elected representatives in the Parliament and the State legislatures.
7. As a result, the exercise to give shape and structure to the Jan Lok Pal mechanism came to be restricted to the Government or the State on the one side and an articulate, but over-projected segment of non- Governmental opinion which sought to reduce the exercise to one of forcing the Government to accept its point of view as representing that of non-Governmental India as a whole.
The country is being inexorably pushed towards a confrontation of unpredictable consequences as a result of the seeming reluctance of the Prime Minister to assert his authority and steer the country out of a messy situation in which it finds itself. This situation is characterised by a widening divide between the Government and large sections of public opinion on the issue of setting up a permanent and independent investigating and prosecuting machinery to be called Jan Lok Pal to deal with corruption.
ReplyDelete2.The movement for setting up an independent and powerful Jan Lok Pal can no longer be dismissed as purely a movement spearheaded by a politically conscious and manipulative elite claiming to represent the so-called civil society. Growing sections of the people identify themselves with the objectives of the movement as a result of Anna Hazare, an anti-corruption activist with no political ambitions till now, assuming its leadership.