Today, six former MLAs filed court papers citing “reductions in their pensions”. Former legislators Rakesh Pandey and other former legislators challenged the government’s “one MLA-one pension” measure by claiming that it had reduced their pensions, which were much higher than the lump sum amount fixed by the amendment, retroactively through an impugned letter.
Also, the bench of Chief Justice Ravi Shanker Jha and Justice Arun Palli was informed of the double implications of the impugned action. A lump sum of Rs 60,000 was paid in place of the pension they had accrued over multiple terms. Aside from this, the subsequent terms will not allow any further accruals or additions. According to the petitioners, this equates “unequal persons”. Further, they argued that the system did not distinguish between long- and short-serving MLAs.
Aside from this, the impugned measures treat legislators who have served multiple terms in the same manner as someone who has served as an MLA for a single term. Taking such an action, whether administratively or legislatively, would be totally arbitrary and violate the Constitution’s Article 14.
Furthermore, a former legislator’s pension entitlements are no longer linked to the number of terms he or she served.