HC Seeks Info on Telangana’s Total Debt
The interim stay was issued on August 12 over the implementation of GOs related to Kalyana Lakshmi and Shaadi Mubarak schemes, following the government`s delay in filing the affidavit.
Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court on Thursday directed the principal secretary of the Telangana finance department to file a detailed counter explaining the state’s debt accumulation, particularly in relation to funding large welfare schemes, and its compliance with the provisions of the Telangana State Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act, 2005.
As no remarks were made on the outstanding debt of the state government in an affidavit filed by the state government — in response to a petition filed challenging the legal basis of implementing Kalyana Lakshmi or Shaadi Mubarak schemes — Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar viewed that it is necessary to deal with the debts accumulated for implementing the larger welfare schemes.
Alarmed over delay in the payment of salaries for staff working in various courts of Mahbubnagar district and several pending cases related to the government's statutory duty on payments of pending bills and compensation, Justice Shravan Kumar said, “Danger bells are ringing”. Further, the judge stressed the need for the government to balance welfare expenditure with its statutory and other financial obligations.
Additional advocate-general Md Imran Khan once again on Thursday urged the court to take up the Interim Application filed by the state seeking vacation of the stay issued on the GOs related to Kalyana Lakshmi and Shaadi Mubarak schemes in view of the affidavit filed by the state government.
The interim stay was issued on August 12 over the implementation of GOs related to Kalyana Lakshmi and Shaadi Mubarak schemes, following the government`s delay in filing the affidavit.
Following the court`s direction regarding payment of compensation to the land losers, whose land was acquired long ago for state infrastructure, Imran Khan said token numbers had already been issued by the finance department, and the compensation amounts would be released shortly.
The judge scrutinised the counter-affidavit filed by the principal secretary, backward classes welfare department, on behalf of the state government. The judge pointed out that Article 162 of the Constitution had been incorrectly reproduced in the affidavit by the Principal Secretary and took it seriously. However, on submissions of the AAG that the mistake was not intentional and that it was by mistake, the Judge directed for a fresh counter affidavit. The matter was adjourned to August 24.