Nitish annuls 34 'out of turn' decisions by Manjhi cabinet

The Nitish Kumar government today annulled 34 populist 'out of turn' decisions taken during last three cabinet meetings by former chief minister Jitan Ram Manjhi days before resigning.
The state cabinet presided over by Chief Minister Nitish Kumar annulled the Manjhi's populist decisions.
Principal Secretary Cabinet Coordination B Pradhan told reporters that the departments were told that if they found importance in any of these decisions it could be proposed before the cabinet in future by following proper procedures.
The Manjhi cabinet in its last three meetings on February 10, 18 and 19 had gone on a spree to roll out many a populist proposals even though there were no written proposals through departments under the procedure.

The items annulled included increasing fund for legislators from Rs 2 crore to Rs 3 crore annually under CM Development schemes from next fiscal, setting up a committee to study reservation for poor among forward castes, providing 13 months salaries to policemen instead of 12 months and giving reservation to backward, most backward and women applicants in contract of Road Construction Department, Pradhan said.
The other decision done away today were reserving 35 per cent post for women in government services in non-gazetted posts and appointment of one "Swachhata karmi" (cleanness staff) in 46,000 villages at a payment of Rs 5000 per month.

Some other decisions annulled were, recommending to the Centre to provide Rs 1000 additional amount to cooks under mid-day meal scheme, and increasing payment to Home Guards from Rs 300 to Rs 400 per day and increasing TA for them from 20 per cent to 50 per cent.

The Nitish Kumar cabinet has already turned down Manjhi cabinet decision to replace Advocate General Ram Balak Mahto with Vinod Kumar Kanth by reinstating Mahto.
The cabinet today approved 11 agendas.
Among important decisions were increasing surcharge on petrol and diesel to 20 per cent from 10 per cent on companies.
Pradhan said the decision to double fuel surcharge was on companies and did not tantamount to increasing consumer prices of these items.