NIPER Board of Governors an office of profit for MPs?

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, February 5

A controversy has erupted over the issue of office of profit and the Board of Governors of the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER).

The NIPER Research Employees’ Welfare Association is claiming that MPs cannot be said to be holding an office of profit if they are on the Board of Governors. The Centre is insisting otherwise.

The argument is significant as the NIPER Act makes nomination of MPs on the Board of Governors mandatory. The association says a Board of Governors without MPs cannot be considered legally constituted while the Centre says they just cannot be nominated.

Without going into the controversy as to whether office of member of Board of Governors was an office of profit, Justice Arun Monga of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Union of India to take appropriate steps to correct the irregularity by induction of MPs in due course as per the provisions of the NIPER Act.

Alternatively, Justice Monga has directed the initiation of appropriate steps to make the office of member of Board of Governor “non-profitable” so that the provisions of the Act were in consonance with Article 102 of the Constitution of India and new members could be inducted.

“In view of the nature of directions passed, the controversy whether office of member of Board of Governors of NIPER is an office of profit or not is kept open to be decided in appropriate proceedings,” Justice Monga ruled.

The association, among other things, had moved the High Court for issuance of directions to the respondents to comply with sub-section 4(3) (O) of the NIPER Act. Their counsel KK Gupta submitted that the Board of Governors could not be considered legally constituted unless two members of the Lower House and one of the Upper House were nominated to it.

Appearing before Justice Monga’s Bench, Additional Solicitor General of India Satya Pal Jain on the other hand contended that an opinion was sought from the Department of Legal Affairs regarding nomination of MP on the Board of Governors. He stated that the department was of the opinion that a member on the board was considered holding an office of profit. The same was, therefore, hit by Article 102, Constitution of India, which debarred a sitting Parliamentarian to accept an office of profit.