'State Disaster Response Fund Cannot Be Diverted' : Supreme Court Asks AP Govt To Revert To SDRF Diverted Amount
While hearing a plea alleging State of Andhra Pradesh has transferred funds from the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF), from where the ex-gratia compensation is being disbursed to the kin of the person who have lost their lives to COVID-19, to its personal deposit (PD) account, the Supreme Court, on Monday, noted money from the SDRF cannot be diverted or used for any other purpose and it...
While hearing a plea alleging State of Andhra Pradesh has transferred funds from the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF), from where the ex-gratia compensation is being disbursed to the kin of the person who have lost their lives to COVID-19, to its personal deposit (PD) account, the Supreme Court, on Monday, noted money from the SDRF cannot be diverted or used for any other purpose and it would be proper to revert the diverted amount to the SDRF.
At the outset Additional Solicitor General, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati apprised the Bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, that as per the CAG Report though there was no diversion, there was some violation in guidelines for which a penalty would be imposed.
Senior Advocate, Mr. R. Basant appearing on behalf of the State of Andhra Pradesh informed the Bench that no diversion had been made, other than the diversion in 2018 for the purpose of drought relief. However, he added, the same was not utilised and the money is lying in the Personal Deposit account of the Commissioner of Agriculture. Mr. Basant submitted -
"It (fund diverted) was meant to be given as a subsidy to the drought affected. That could not be given…Temporarily it was transferred."
In view of the same, Justice Shah noted that it is imperative that the said un-utilised fund be reverted back to the SDRF.
"Any amount for the SDRF cannot be diverted. Therefore, it has to come back to SDRF. You see to that. You cannot use it for other purposes…It is not used, then restore it to SDRF."
As Mr. Basant requested the Bench to grant some time to take instructions with respect to the same, the Bench stated that in that case it would be compelled to pass directions. Justice Shah noted that if the State is permitted to keep the transferred amount in the PD account it would set a bad precedent for the other States to follow:
"It must revert back to SDRF. If the fund is not utilised for droughts then it should come back. Otherwise every State will transfer for a purpose and then not use it, but the said amount would not be reverted and used for the SDRF fund."
Mr. Basant emphasised that the diversion was for drought relief. But, Justice Shah stated -
"You have to revert. As of today if you say that the money is required for drought, we will consider, but otherwise not."
Justice Nagarathna observed that the State ought to ascertain that there is no shortfall in COVID compensation. The diverted fund, if reverted, can be utilised for the compensation purpose.
Mr. Basant assured the Bench that there is no shortfall in that regard.
Justice Shah noted -
"At the moment there is no shortfall, what if it is today."
However, after much persuasion, the Bench agreed to provide time to the Senior Counsel for file a response. The case will be considered again on July 13.
[Case Title: Gaurav Kumar Bansal v Union of India And Ors. MA 647/2022 in W.P.(C) No. 539/2021]
Click here to read/download the order