“Autonomy of CBI” is one of the glaring examples that involves both the Supreme Court of India’s direction and Parliamentary Committees recommendation. Union Cabinet under the UPA had given green signal for enhancing of autonomy of CBI in response to Supreme Court’s direction. In the meantime, Modi government came to power in 2014, and the preparation of the draft bill for autonomy of CBI, never taken in right earnest. Rather, Modi government has been alleged of misusing all central agencies including CBI against its political adversaries.
The parliamentary committee had asked specific details about action taken for providing autonomy to CBI, but Modi government evaded the core issue in its reply, because ‘the government has not yet finalized the draft bill for autonomy of CBI’. The Committee has expressed its displeasure over the fact that the Union Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions had actually side-tracked the core issue related to the assurance by furnishing an evasive and vague implementation report.

In the last report, the committee had observed that Ministries and departments often do not seek extensions before expiry of the extended period for fulfillment of assurances granted by the Committee. They rather take the plea that they had sought extensions for a specific period and think that they have automatically got the desired extension. The committee found that government does not take the observations in its right spirit, and on being reminded of the delay seeking extension, they simply regret and seek to condone the delay.

While expressing general displeasure, the Committee has noted that a large number of request for extension are being sent after expiry of the extended period and in some cases, no extension has been sought in spite of communications sent to the Secretary concerned.

Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs have been found ignoring the Committee itself that amount to ignoring the legislature itself. The ministry has sent a letter to all the Ministries that “implementation reports, extension requests, and dropping requests are required to be uploaded on OAMS portal only. No physical copies or e-mails need to be sent to any authority. Implementation Reports need to be addressed to the Under Secretary of this Ministry while Extension Requests and Dropping Requests need to be addressed to the respective committee on government assurances.”

It has been done despite a recommendation in the last report of the Parliamentary Committee that “it is the prerogative of the Committee to consider and decide on any request for extension and dropping.” The Committee had further directed that “all requests for extension of time for fulfilment of assurances and dropping of assurances should be sent directly to the Committee on mandatory basis through e-mail … or physically for taking a view thereon.”

Parliamentary Committee has observed that ministries and departments do not respond promptly to the communications sent from the Committee. It has also been observed that a number of Implementation Reports sent to Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs by various ministries and departments remain pending for laying on the table of the House, which unnecessarily delay the fulfilment and liquidation of assurances.

Not only that, the government sends implementation reports for a few assurances, and are tabled in the parliament and are treated as fulfilled, while similar other assurances remain pending for years. Moreover, ministries and departments are found to not even maintaining record for assurance given. The Committee has reported that when it takes up the matter of given assurances, ministries and departments convey that either they do not have any information regarding the pending assurances or there is no record available in the ministries and departments concerned. The Committee has expressed its displeasure over this casual approach.

The Committee has enlisted the number of delayed extensions for fulfilment of the assurance given by the Modi government, which are altogether 300 from 39 ministries. Highest number of unfulfilled assurances are from Railways which is 64, followed by Law and Justice 42, Environment Forest and Climate Change 21, Social Justice and empowerment 18, Youth Affairs and Sports 15, Electronics and Information Technology 13, Health and Family Welfare 12, Tourism 10, and Finance 10. Other ministries have unfulfilled or delayed extensions in single digit.

The report has also provided a list of ministry or department-wise pending assurances which are altogether 646. Highest pending assurance cases are in Railways which are 66; followed by Law and Justice 50; Road Transport and Highways 34; Education 32; Defence 28; Home Affairs 24; Finance 23; Commerce and Industry 22; Communications 21; Social Justice and Empowerment 21; Culture 19; Environment, Forest & Climate Change 19; Chemical and Fertilizers 18; Tourism 17; Youth Affairs and Sports 17; Electronics and Information Technology 16; Health and Family Welfare 15; Labour and Employment 15; Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions 14; Textiles 13; Jal Shakti 11; Women and Child Development 11; Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare 10; and Housing and Urban Affairs 10. Other ministries have pending cases in single digit.

Committee is of the view that in a parliamentary democracy, the executive is accountable to legislature for all its acts of omission and commission in fulfilling the given assurances. Hence, delay in fulfilment of assurances beyond a reasonable period of one year or so ultimately results in denial of information.