Why Jaya is in a mess
ANY GOVERNMENT office or post which brings pecuniary, administrative, executive or other powers to its occupant constitutes an office of profit which an MP is not supposed to hold unless the law makes an exemption.india Updated: Mar 07, 2006 01:51 IST
ANY GOVERNMENT office or post which brings pecuniary, administrative, executive or other powers to its occupant constitutes an office of profit which an MP is not supposed to hold unless the law makes an exemption. “Even if a person does not draw a salary while occupying such a post, he/she will still be considered to be holding an office of profitbecause of the administrative and financial powers that flow with the position. Not drawing a salary is no exemption,’’ said G C Malhotra, former Secretary General of Lok Sabha, without expressly referring to Jaya Bachchan controversy.
Subhash Kashyap, another former Secretary General of the Lok Sabha, pointed out that an office of profit is linked to a government office and not to a private company. Certain offices, however, are exempted from that category by law. In fact, a ministerial position is actually an office of profit but is not considered so, because it has been exempted from that category by law.
Talking to HT, senior officer of UP had earlier said as chairperson Uttar Pradesh Film Development Council, Jaya Bachchan was holding only an “advisory” post. No financial powers were attached to her office, he said. All the financial powers were with “Film Bandhu” and the council was only an advisory body, he said adding Jaya Bachchan merely enjoyed the rank of a Cabinet minister and was neither drawing any salary nor was she claiming any TA, DA or any other allowances for attending council’s meetings. Significantly, the objections against Jaya Bachchan were raised even at the time when she filed her nomination papers for the Rajya Sabha seat in 2004. Leader of the Congress Legislature Party Pramod Tiwari had then raised the objection before the returning officer.
At that point Bachchan had stated that she had already resigned from the post of chairperson of UP Film Development Council. After her election to Rajya Sabha she was appointed on the post again. A Congress candidate Madan Mohan, whose nomination papers were rejected, however, challenged her nomination, this time on the grounds that she was holding an office of profit