Grounds

A.        For the constitution having provided that the members of the state legislature shall be paid salaries and allowances and the entry no 38 list II being also specific to that effect, an enactment for pension for members of the state legislature is ultra vires of the state assembly.

B.        For the provisions of pension  for representatives  to democratic institutions like  Parliament or Assembly goes against the basic structure of  constitution  as much as it creates  vested interests, if not fontal , for the time being held by a representative beyond his tenure, irrespective of peoples’ verdict as to his performance. No other democracy in the world has such provision.

C.         The concept of pension being intrinsically related to a sense of gratitude for the quality of service rendered, on a provision unrelated to any consideration of quality of service rendered is abhorrent to the idea of pension and amounts to ex gratia payment out of public funds for a purpose prohibited by the constitution by necessary implication (apexing from specific purpose for which the members of the Assembly are to be entitled to payment out of the consolidated fund.)

D.        For that a welfare state being the prime direction under chapter IV of constitution, measures of personal welfare by the people’s representative to the legislature   by providing pensions for themselves is contrary to the basic tenets of constitution especially in the background of 88 % of the people of the state being under poverty line.

E.         That  the legislature having determined the  salary of the ministers and of speaker and the Deputy speaker respective under Orissa Act 20 of 1960 and Orissa Act of  25 of  1960. And Orissa act 25 of 1969, the impugned provisions has the effect of supplementing such salaries without effecting an amendment of the Act. As such it is a fraud on the constitution.

F.         For that the members of  legislature stand classified by differentiation of  their emoluments  under the impugned  provision contrary to the concept of their  having equal status under the constitution as such violates  Art 14 and other provisions of the constitution.

G.        For that the impugned provisions are connived malafide to be utilized as an ultra constitutional means to the people’s representatives from giving freehold and aliased expression to their opinion by holding out allurement of perks.Brought in at a time  while the country was  with the demand for dissolution of the parliament and state legislature at the poser of the curtailment of democratic rights guaranteed by the constitution and of change in the basic structure of the constitution sought to be struck off  when peoples’ verdict was enormously in favor of  retaining the democratic structure and value under the constitution, decided to retain the provisions for  no obtabasible  reason except a change in the political atmosphere which threatened  to the dissolution of legislature due to split and factional activities amended by  ordinance 16 of 979 curtailing the  period for which the benefit is available, at a time when the ruling power was faced with likely situation of dissolution of the Assembly, the measure with regard to  pension is a political weapon to be welded by the ruling power to control and modulate the free will of the people’s representatives to suits its purposes, It is therefore a mischievous measure  enacted malafide  to malign and subvert  the basic tenets of democracy which is the cornerstone of our constitution.

H.        For that payment for journey unconnected  with the business  of the Assembly or duty as a legislature cannot be termed as allowance and the enactment for the same is for mis applying public fund is abhorrent to the Constitution.