VVIP power

Allahabad High Court is right to question the differential distribution of a public resource

Allahabad High Court is right to question the differential distribution of a public resource

If VVIP is not a dictionary term,can VVIPs exist at all? Are they not merely puffed-up VIPs? This is one of the questions raised by the Allahabad High Court while responding to a plea by two cold storage owners from Ghazipur district,who have turned the heat on the states VVIPs. They had sought relief from the inequity of the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd,which supplies their facilities for only a few hours a day while the power never goes off in cold storages located in districts that see a lot of VVIP movement. Etawah,Mainpuri,Kannauj,Rampur,Sambhal,Rae Bareli and Amethi house the constituencies of prominent politicians,including the Yadavs and the Gandhis. The court has expanded the plea in the public interest and ruled that a public resource like electricity must be allocated even-handedly.

Citizens tired of VVIPs sequestering rights or preferential access to resources held in common would be cheered by the ruling,since the principle applied is readily extended. The very,very important,in politics and the administration,have come to assume that they can rightfully shoulder aside lesser mortals who impede smooth access to the feeding trough. The resources arrogated in this manner range from housing to everyday right of way the latter has caused several outcries about the propriety of using car rooftop lights. Now,the proactive manner in which the Allahabad HC has upheld equity may encourage similar legal action against this problem.

However,this case actually stands apart because electricity is a political coin that is leveraged electorally. Crucial for irrigation,uninterrupted power supply figures prominently in the assurances that politicians dole out before the polls. It is outrageous that,in an energy-poor state like UP,some politicians are able to keep that promise to their constituents by virtue of their mere presence,until the deficits that it spells for people in other areas urges them to approach the courts. Not only is preferential allocation of electricity to constituents unfair,it is democratically unethical. A common asset,which those in power are expected to hold in a fiduciary capacity,should not be distributed differentially to influence poll outcomes.