The Rajya Sabha Secretariat is understood to have sought the Law Ministry’s views on whether it could take up amendments to a rule relating to charging of airport development fee after the mandatory 30-day period for carrying out these changes is over.

The matter relates to amending the Airports Authority of India (Major Airports) Development Fee Rules, 2011, which authorise private-led airport operators to charge DF after an order passed by the regulator, Airports Economic Regulatory Authority (AERA).

The issue came up after a scheduled discussion on a Statutory Motion was not allowed to be held in Rajya Sabha on Friday with the Deputy Chairman, Mr K. Rahman Khan, saying it cannot be taken up as any amendment of rules should be debated and decided within 30 days and that deadline had elapsed by a day.

But CPI(M) MP, Mr K.N. Balagopal, who had moved the motion along with BJP’s Mr S.S. Ahluwalia, blamed the government for the delay in listing the matter on the agenda saying the motion was moved first during the monsoon session and then again in this session, way before the 30-day deadline.

He also shot off a letter to the Rajya Sabha Chairman, Mr Hamid Ansari, blaming the government for delaying the motion and crossing the laid-down time limit and urging him to protect the legislative powers of Parliament.

Following this, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat has sought the opinion of the Law Ministry on the matter, sources said.

“I doubt there is a conspiracy behind this attitude of the government to protect the interests of those who collected Rs 1,481 crore (worth of DF) illegally and further, it intends to give illegal benefits to companies which are part of the PPP model of development of airports,” he said.

The AERA had recently issued an order allowing the GMR-led Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL) to collect Rs 1,300 per international passenger and Rs 200 from each domestic passenger as DF from December 1.

The Statutory Motion, which was on Rajya Sabha agenda on Friday, said: “the Development Fee shall not be collected for and on behalf of those operators/lessees who had been awarded contract to develop such airports before the introduction of DF.”

It also mandated that all accounts relating to DF collection and disbursal should be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

Mr Balagopal said in his letter to Mr Ansari that DF “was not part of the original contract. Through this, an airport developer will get around Rs 1,000 crore per year.

“I am afraid that the attitude of the government will be a black mark on the history of Parliamentary privileges, independence of the legislature and our democratic values.”

Asserting that he was “not responsible” for the delay, the CPI (M) MP said he had given the notice “much earlier” which was accepted, listed and two hours allotted for debate by the Business Advisory Committee.

If the Statutory Motion was not allowed due to such delays by the government, Mr Balagopal said “an evil and anti-national conspiracy on the part of the government may scuttle any major initiative by Parliament to control excessive governmental action through rule making.”

“For example, the latest Notice for Statutory Motion to amend the provisions of rules of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damages Act, 2010 can easily be discarded by the government to protect the nuclear companies from paying adequate compensation to the people of India,” he alleged.

Mr Balagopal sought appropriate action on the matter by Mr Ansari and urged him to ensure that his parliamentary privilege was not infringed upon.

Related Topics