On November 11, 2024, Mian Mehar Ali, the Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) for Kangan, issued an order directing the withholding of salaries for three senior medical officers – the Block Medical Officer (BMO) of Kangan, the Zonal Medical Officer (ZMO) of PHC Wussan, and the ZMO of NTPHC Chattergul.
This action, which cites dereliction of official duties and poor conditions at local health centers, raises critical questions about the scope of an MLA’s powers, the administrative and legal framework governing government functions in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), and the broader implications for public sector accountability.
In his order, MLA Kangan highlighted a range of inadequacies within local healthcare services, including non-functional medical equipment, unhygienic conditions, and shortages of vital medicines. These issues, he argued, have led to significant public dissatisfaction, prompting him to take direct action against the responsible medical officers.
While the public’s frustration with these conditions is understandable, the core issue is whether an elected legislator possesses the legal authority to unilaterally impose such punitive measures. Under the governance framework of Jammu and Kashmir as a Union Territory (UT), the powers of elected representatives like MLAs are distinct from those of the executive bureaucracy.
The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019 restructured the region’s administrative framework, transitioning J&K from a state to a Union Territory. While local governance remains under the purview of the Legislative Assembly, executive functions, including the oversight of the civil service, now fall under the control of the Lieutenant Governor (LG). The governance structure established post-reorganization places clear boundaries between the legislative and executive branches.
Crucially, the administrative and disciplinary powers over civil servants, including medical officers, are governed by a series of rules, notably the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules, 1956, and the Jammu and Kashmir Government Employees (Conduct) Rules.
These regulations stipulate that disciplinary actions, such as salary withholding, must be carried out by an authorized disciplinary authority, typically within the concerned department. The Health and Medical Education Department would typically hold this responsibility for the officers in question. Actions like withholding salaries must follow a formal inquiry process, ensuring that civil servants are given due process before any penalties are imposed.
The MLA’s order, however, does not appear to follow the procedures laid out in these regulations. As per the J&K Civil Services Rules, the authority to withhold salaries or take similar punitive measures lies with the relevant administrative authorities, not directly with elected legislators. This suggests that MLA Kangan’s actions may be an overreach, as he lacks the legal authority to unilaterally impose such penalties without the involvement of the relevant administrative departments.
The issue also touches upon the broader principle of separation of powers. The role of an MLA is primarily legislative; they are tasked with raising issues of public concern, questioning government officials, and proposing solutions through formal legislative channels. However, an MLA’s role does not extend to direct administrative action or interference with the day-to-day operations of government departments.
The MLA could have used his position to raise concerns within the Legislative Assembly through questions, motions, or resolutions. He could have also approached the relevant Health Minister or Chief Medical Officer to address the issue in a manner consistent with the governance framework.
By bypassing these established channels and issuing a direct order to withhold salaries, MLA Kangan risks undermining the administrative hierarchy and may set a problematic precedent for future interactions between elected officials and the bureaucracy. Such actions could erode the professionalism and autonomy of the civil service, creating an environment where bureaucrats may become more focused on political appeasement than on their professional responsibilities.
The administrative confusion that could arise from such actions might lead to inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, particularly in areas like healthcare, where continuity and stability are crucial. Moreover, while the MLA’s concerns about the state of public health facilities are valid, the legality of his actions remains questionable. Political expediency should not override due process in administrative matters.
The MLA’s frustration, though understandable given the poor conditions, should have been channeled through proper legislative mechanisms, such as questioning the relevant ministers or requesting a formal inquiry into the conditions of the health centers. This would have ensured that the issue was addressed in a way that respected the rule of law and the principles of governance. If the MLA’s order stands unchallenged, it could set a troubling precedent. It may encourage other elected officials to take similar unilateral actions, bypassing the established administrative processes and undermining the authority of the bureaucracy.
Such a trend could lead to politicization of administrative functions and a breakdown in the functioning of the public service. Moreover, it could also embolden elected representatives to interfere in matters traditionally within the executive domain, undermining the institutional integrity of the civil service.
In light of the legal and procedural concerns, the MLA’s order to withhold salaries should be considered null and void. The order lacks the necessary legal foundation under the J&K Reorganization Act, the Civil Services Regulations, and the Government Employees (Conduct) Rules. Only an appropriate disciplinary authority, acting through the proper channels, can initiate such penalties. The MLA’s direct intervention in this matter is not only a breach of legal procedures but also risks creating confusion and undermining the system of checks and balances essential for good governance.
To prevent further overreach and ensure that elected representatives understand the boundaries of their authority, it is essential for the legal framework governing administrative oversight to be clarified. MLAs should continue to serve as important vehicles for public concerns but must act within their legislative mandate, using the appropriate channels to address issues. The balance between political accountability and bureaucratic autonomy must be maintained to ensure that public services remain professional, efficient, and focused on the welfare of the people.
While MLA Kangan’s frustration with the local healthcare system is understandable, his decision to unilaterally withhold salaries is a clear overstep of his legislative mandate. Such actions undermine the principles of administrative law, violate the established legal framework, and could potentially harm the relationship between elected officials and the civil service.
To safeguard the integrity of the governance system, it is essential that political leaders respect the boundaries of their powers and work through the appropriate channels to hold the executive accountable.
