Revenue Deficit Grant – Himachal Assembly Passes RDG Resolution Amid Uproar

Revenue Deficit Grant – The Himachal Pradesh Assembly on Wednesday witnessed sharp exchanges after a government resolution seeking restoration of the Revenue Deficit Grant was passed without the support of opposition BJP legislators. The debate unfolded against the backdrop of the 16th Finance Commission’s recommendation to discontinue the grant, a move that has triggered political disagreement in the hill state.

Chief Minister Seeks United Stand

Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu expressed disappointment over the opposition’s refusal to back the resolution. Addressing reporters outside the House, he said the Revenue Deficit Grant had been provided as a constitutional entitlement and was vital for Himachal Pradesh’s financial stability.

He stated that the government had hoped to present a unified front before the Centre on the matter. According to him, he had proposed that leaders from all parties jointly meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi to press for the restoration of the grant. However, when the issue was formally raised under Rule 102 in the Assembly following the Finance Commission’s recommendation, the opposition chose not to endorse the resolution.

Sukhu maintained that the grant was not tied to any particular government but represented the rights of the people of the state. He added that the discontinuation could have serious consequences for the state’s fiscal planning.

Opposition Counters Government’s Claims

Leader of Opposition Jairam Thakur rejected the Chief Minister’s assertions. Speaking to the media, Thakur accused the government of presenting inaccurate figures in the Assembly. He argued that if the state is no longer receiving the Revenue Deficit Grant, responsibility rests with the present Congress administration for not effectively presenting Himachal Pradesh’s case before the Finance Commission.

The BJP has maintained that the government failed to adequately defend the state’s financial interests during deliberations that led to the recommendation to withdraw the grant.

Speaker Outlines Assembly Proceedings

Assembly Speaker Kuldeep Singh Pathania confirmed that the House had devoted two days to a detailed discussion on the issue. He said members were given sufficient opportunity to express their views before the resolution was put to a vote and passed by a majority.

Pathania added that the resolution would now be forwarded to Parliament and the Central Government for consideration. He expressed hope that a constructive decision would be taken keeping in mind the interests of Himachal Pradesh and other hill states facing similar financial challenges.

Disruptions Mark Debate in the House

The proceedings were marked by repeated interruptions as the Chief Minister responded to the debate. The atmosphere grew tense when Sukhu referred to the February 1 discontinuation of the grant and outlined the steps taken by his government thereafter. He said consultations were held with various stakeholders to assess the potential impact on the state’s economy.

Sukhu also noted that an all-party meeting had been convened without political considerations to deliberate on the issue. He claimed that during that meeting, BJP state president Rajeev Bindal was not prepared to speak on the grant, and that the venue was shifted from the Secretariat to Peterhoff at his request.

Budgetary Concerns Raised

Highlighting the financial implications, the Chief Minister warned that the stoppage of the Revenue Deficit Grant could compel the state to implement a 15 percent reduction in its budget. He described the three-day Assembly session as an effort to address concerns affecting various sections of society and questioned the opposition’s stance on the matter.

The issue of the Revenue Deficit Grant has become a focal point in Himachal Pradesh’s political discourse, reflecting broader concerns over fiscal federalism and the financial health of hill states. With the Assembly resolution now set to reach the Centre, attention will turn to how the Union Government responds to the state’s appeal.