Editor,
I may perhaps not have submitted this letter if not for the interest shown by the readers in the online poll and also the phrasing of the question in the poll “Do you feel time has come for the State Chief Secretary WMS Pariat to come clean with sufficient evidence on the ongoing controversy over his official residence?”, which raises the doubt that there was something dirty or incorrect and illegal about the payment of “house rentallowance” to the Chief Secretary. Under the circumstances,it would be appropriate to spell out the facts of the matter in order to set the record straight and toinform the public about the correct factual position of the case.
I would like to mention the following facts, which are based on matters of verifiable record, unlike the incorrect accusations and innuendos which have appeared in the Shillong Times during its series of articles on the matter:
1. There are two types of Government bungalows/ residences both in the State and in the Center, i.e. those which are known as designated quarters and those which are not. Officials who are entitled to designated quarters are extremely small in number, and are limited to such officers who are holding an office which is considered critical to the affairs of the State or of the District, and whose functioning should not be put even to the slightest inconvenience because of non-availability of appropriate accom-modation. Theseofficials are very few in number, and include the Chief Secretary, the DG of Police, the DC and the SP of the District etc. By virtue of the important nature of the positions held by them, they are also required to carry on many functions of ceremonial or confidential nature from these designated residential quarters, which also house a bungalow office. Because of this, these designated quarters are normally furnished by Government, and no house rent is payable by the officer for their use. They are Rent Free, furnished accomm-odation. Normally, even when the officer for whom the Designated Bungalow is meant for, does not occupy the quarter, it is not allotted to any other functionary, since this could come in the way of further allotment when the designated officer decides to move in.
2. The Chief Secretary is entitled to the designated official rent free bungalow “Lum Pyngngad”, which I have, however, not occupied because of the fact that since 1987, I had moved to the family’s personal residence, and I had not considered it necessary to move to the official quarter for a limited time, because of the inconvenience involved. However, I had used the official quarter from time to time for official meetings and get-togethers.
3. The Governments, both Central and State, have framed Rules under which House rent allowance is paid to its employees, so as to enable them to rent suitable accommodation. Even employees who stay in their own personal accommodation are eligible for this allowance in order to enable them to maintain their personal house. This House Rent/ House Maintenance Allowance (known by a short form of HRA) is normally payable in terms of a fixed percentage of the basic pay of the official concerned. It may be mentioned that in Meghalaya, almost all State Government employees are drawing the House Rent/ House Maintenance Allowance as mentioned above, and they would all be aware of these facts.
4. Since I am residing with my family at Mawlai Nonglum, I am also entitled to draw the House Rent/ House Maintenance Allowance (Rs. 16000/-) as indicated above, subject to due certification as necessary under the Rules. I would like to state, very clearly and unequivocally, that I have not, repeat not, violated any Government instructions in the matter, nor have I been guilty of infringing or circumventing any related rules, regulations, or instructions, and nor is it ethically wrong. I stay in my own family house, I look after its maintenance and HRA is admissible in these circumstances. Thus, I have claimed, and have been duly authorised by the Accountant General, the pay and allowances as permissible to me, as per the relevant rules and guidelines of the Government.
5. The articles in the Shillong Times had also tried to cast reflection on me as an officer who had mis-utilised Government funds for the purpose of furnishing an un-occupied Government Bungalow. It has since been officially clarified that while certain limited amounts had been spent on the CS’s official bungalow, theindents for these had been made duringthe tenure of my predecessors, and rightfully so, I may add, because Govt. assets should be maintained so that they do not deteriorate over time. Since the bungalow office is also used for official meetings with visiting dignitaries etc., its upkeep befitting the dignity of the office and the occasion becomes imperative.
6. I have explained the above facts so that they can be appreciated by your reading public, and so that their mis-representation, which had taken place over the last few weeks, does not further tarnish my image and reputation. I wish that your reporter, even if he had not been able to confirm matters from me, had consulted the authorities who were aware of the above facts and the rules on which they were based before publishing the articles on a subject which he seems to be least conversant with.
Yours etc.,
W M S Pariat
Chief Secretary Government of Meghalaya
