It refers to Lok Sabha Speaker resisting demand of some Parliamentarians to hand over Mavlangkar Auditorium to Constitution Club, where both the institutions are situated in the same premises. There are two groups of Parliamentarians with MPs of various political parties scattered in both the groups cutting across party-lines with a group presently managing affairs of the Parliamentarians’ elite club not accepting it as a public-authority answerable under RTI Act. Other group demands, rightly so, accountability in affairs of club alleging many irregularities in functioning of the Club.
Best is to bring Constitution Club under Lok Sabha Secretariat and then transferring Mavlangkar Auditorium under it. It is senseless that the elite club having prime piece of government-land at heavily subsidised cost is resisting it being a public-authority despite also the fact it is chaired ex-officio by Lok Sabha Speaker. However autonomy in functioning of the Club can be given to an elected body after it being declared a public-authority. Central Information Commission should decide a long-pending petition number CIC/SM/C/2011/000097 filed against Lok Sabha Secretariat on aspect of Constitution Club being a public-authority or not.
Madhu Agrawal
Delhi