Rules Cited by the PMO
The PMO referred to Rule 41(2)(viii) and Rule 41(2)(xvii) of the Lok Sabha rules to justify its position. These provisions restrict questions that do not directly concern the Government of India or relate to bodies not primarily accountable to it.
Rule 41(2)(viii) bars questions on matters not primarily the concern of the central government, while Rule 41(2)(xvii) disallows queries concerning entities not under government control or responsibility.
The PMO advised that if questions, Zero Hour notices, or special mentions on these funds are raised, the Lok Sabha Secretariat may invoke these provisions while determining admissibility.
Why the Funds Are Treated Differently
Officials familiar with the matter said the key reason cited by the PMO is the financial nature of the three funds. Since their corpus is built solely from voluntary donations and not from budgetary allocations approved by Parliament, they are not treated as government expenditure.
This distinction, the PMO argued, places the funds outside the regular framework of parliamentary oversight that applies to ministries and departments funded through the Consolidated Fund.
Legal Status of PM CARES Fund
The PM CARES Fund was established in March 2020 during the Covid-19 outbreak as a public charitable trust. Its trust deed was registered under the Registration Act, 1908, in New Delhi.
According to its official disclosures, the fund is meant to provide assistance during national emergencies and distress situations. As per its latest publicly available receipts and payments report for 2022–23, the fund had a closing balance of over Rs 6,200 crore at the end of March 2023.
In January 2023, the Centre told the Delhi High Court that PM CARES is neither created under the Constitution nor through any law enacted by Parliament. It also maintained that the trust is not owned or controlled by the government, despite its board comprising holders of public office.
RTI and Audit Questions
The Centre has consistently maintained that PM CARES does not fall under the definition of a “public authority” under the Right to Information Act. This position has been reiterated in court affidavits.
In August 2020, the Supreme Court declined to direct the transfer of PM CARES funds to the National Disaster Response Fund, observing that both funds serve distinct purposes and operate under different frameworks.
The court also noted that while the National Disaster Response Fund is audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, there is no legal requirement for a similar audit of PM CARES, given its status as a charitable trust.
About PMNRF and National Defence Fund
The Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund was established in 1948 to assist displaced persons following Partition. Over the decades, it has been used to provide immediate relief to victims of natural disasters, major accidents, and riots.
The National Defence Fund, meanwhile, is dedicated to the welfare of members of the armed and paramilitary forces and their families. It is administered by an executive committee chaired by the Prime Minister, with the Defence, Finance and Home Ministers as members.
Political and Parliamentary Implications
The PMO’s communication is likely to have implications for opposition efforts to seek greater transparency and accountability regarding these funds within Parliament.
While debates over oversight and disclosure continue outside the House, the PMO’s reliance on procedural rules effectively closes the door on direct parliamentary questioning related to PM CARES, PMNRF and the National Defence Fund.
Official sources in the Lok Sabha Secretariat declined to comment on the communication. The PMO also did not respond to media queries seeking clarification.
