NEW DELHI: Sharp differences have cropped up within the Delhi Cabinet with some of the Ministers opposing any move to curtail their powers in their respective departments with regard to monitoring of development works in the run-up to the 2010 Commonwealth Games in the Capital.

According to highly placed sources, at a recent meeting of the Cabinet, a proposal was brought forward that in the run-up to the Games, monitoring of development works and their implementation should be handed over to the principal secretary of the departments concerned instead of the Minister as is the case now.

It is learnt that the proposal was mooted by Chief Secretary S. Regunathan as part of the "Mission Mode'' formula that would put all infrastructure and related development projects on the fast track. It is learnt that when the proposal came up for consideration, some of the Ministers objected to the move to clip their wings and vest their powers in the bureaucrats. It was felt that since hundreds of crores of funds were at stake, it would not be appropriate to leave everything in the hands of the bureaucracy.

It is learnt that Finance and Urban Development Minister A. K. Walia strongly opposed the move. He is understood to have told the Chief Minister that there was no point in discontinuing the present practise of the ministers monitoring the works. It is understood that Education Minister Arvinder Singh Lovely and Transport Minister Haroon Yusuf also supported their senior colleague.

It is learnt that Dr. Walia and Mr. Lovely disagreed with Mr. Regunathan on the issue of rehabilitation of slum dwellers who were being dislocated under the High Court orders. Sources informed that during the Cabinet meeting Dr. Walia said the Government should think of giving one-time compensation to the slum dwellers who were being dislocated without being provided alternate site. However, Mr. Regunathan opposed this and said this would set a bad precedent for any such situation in future. However, both Dr. Walia and Mr. Lovely are believed to have insisted that the Congress was committed to the welfare of the poor.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail