Plea Challenging PM CARES Fund Validity : Supreme Court Asks Petitioner To Seek Review Before High Court

The Supreme Court, on Friday, directed the petitioner to file a review before the Allahabad High Court in a plea assailing the order of the said High Court, wherein the challenge to the constitutional validity of the PMCARES Fund and the PMNRF in the light of the Disaster Management Act had been rejected. A Bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai noted the submission made by Senior Advocate, Devadatt Kamat, appearing on behalf of the petitioner that all the issues raised in the Writ Petition were not considered by the High Court. "You might be right in saying that all issues were not considered. We don't know if you had argued. You go and file a review. Let us have the benefit of the High Court order." At the outset Mr. Kamat submitted that - "Milords here the High Court has dismissed my WP in limine relying on CPIL(judgment of the Supreme Court)." He stated that the High Court was not correct in dismissing the Writ Petition solely based on the judgment of the Apex court in CPIL v. Union of India. The Bench pointed out that one of the prayers is the same. "Don't say totally different, One of the points was that." Mr. Kamat submitted that - "Validity and disclosure was sought in this WP. That is not the scope of judgment in CPIL.This becomes all the more important because the judgment in CPIL is premised on the PM-CARES Fund does not receive money from the Government." The Bench enquired, "Who are you?" Mr. Kamat responded, "I am a practicing advocate." Justice Rao remarked - "We find too many public spirited lawyers. Last week an advocate in Bangalore was saying reduce NEET cut off marks." The Bench passed order as under - "The Ld. Sr. Counsel for the petitioner referred to the relief claimed in the WP and submitted that the points in the WP had not been dealt with by the High Court while dismissing the WP. The only ground on which the WP was dismissed was that the lis is covered by CPIL. The Ld. Sr Counsel seeks permission to withdraw to approach the High Court filing review to argue the other grounds. The Petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court against the order of the High Court." The SLP filed before the Apex Court challenged the order of the Allahabad High Court, which it claimed, had dismissed the Public Interest Litigation filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India solely based on the judgment of the Apex Court in Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India. The petition clarified that the the challenge in the PIL before the High Court was to the validity of the PMCARES Fund and the Prime Minister National Relief Fund ("PMNRF"), in the light of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 ('2005 Act,' for short) and the constitution of the National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF) by the Central Government thereunder, which is statutory fund created by due process of law, which was not the question before the Apex Court in CPIL (supra). The PMNRF, a public charitable trust, was created on 24.01.1948. After the Constitution of India came into force on 26.01.1950 as per Entry 10 of the Concurrent List in the 7th Schedule, funds were prescribed to be created only by the force of law. Later, in 2005 when the Disaster Management Act was enacted, the National Disaster Relief Fund ("NDRF") was created and the PMNRF lost its utility. On 28.03.2020, during the pandemic, the Central Government created a public charitable trust, PMCARES Fund, without passing any legislation to that effect, in violation of Entry 10. The scrutiny of this trust was also taken out of the purview of the RTI Act, 2005. The petitioner contended that the PMCARES Fund, in effect, substituted a statutory fund i.e. the NDRF, thus weakening the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The petitioner asserted that apart from the contributions (in Lakhs/day) from various Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies, money from Government controlled funds like the 'Assistance related to Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster', meant for victims of Bhopal Gas tragedy were also diverted to the PMCARES Fund. Even prior to the official declaration of the creation of the fund, public money had been pumped into the PMCARES Fund. It was emphasised that the list of contributions to the fund, which is outside the scrutiny of RTI Act, ran into 400 pages as on 06.03.2021. The fund is also unaudited by the CAG. Therefore, the petition asserted that the opaqueness of a fund receiving huge amounts of public money is in the teeth of the democratic values envisaged in the Constitution and was in contravention of Articles 14,19 ans 21. The petition submitted that even though Para 5.3 of the Trust Deed of the PMCARES fund states that the Trust is neither intended to be, nor owned, controlled or substantially financed by any Government or any instrumentality thereof, contributions from various Ministries, Agencies and Departments of...

Plea Challenging PM CARES Fund Validity : Supreme Court Asks Petitioner To Seek Review Before High Court

Sohini Chowdhury

Tags