Mahayuti seeks ₹57,510 crore extra within 14 weeks of ₹7-lakh-crore budget

Hindustan Times

a day ago

MUMBAI: Fourteen weeks after the state government presented a ₹ 7-lakh-crore budget for FY 2025-26, it has tabled supplementary demands of ₹ 57,510 crore—a sum which is about 8.21% of the budget and the second-highest supplementary demand in the history of the state. Terming this a sign of the government's fiscal indiscipline, the opposition and experts said that with further supplementary demands likely to be tabled in December and March, it could cross 15% of the budget and result in an unprecedented rise in the fiscal deficit. CM Devendra Fadnavis, Dy CM Eknath Shinde, Dy CM Ajit Pawar and other MLAs pay respects to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. (Anshuman Poyrekar/ Hindustan Times)
The supplementary demands tabled by finance minister Ajit Pawar on the first day of the monsoon session on Monday will result in a whopping rise in revenue deficit and fiscal deficit. At the time of the budget presentation in March, the revenue deficit was ₹ 45,891 crore while the fiscal deficit was ₹ 13,6235 crore, the highest in Maharashtra's history. According to experts and officials, the additional expenditure will also result in borrowing if the government ends up spending the entire outlay. The government has estimated the debt burden by the end of FY 2025-26 to be ₹ 9.32 lakh crore.
'The revenue receipts of FY 2024-25 were 98.84% of the revised estimate of ₹ 49,8758 crore, which means that the deficit will anyway increase by ₹ 5,808 crore if carried forward to the current fiscal,' said a senior finance department official. 'The addition of supplementary demands of more than 8% is undesirable for any state, following a fiscal deficit. Although there is no regulation on limit, as per convention, supplementary demands should not cross 10% in a fiscal year. Looking at the history of previous supplementary demands by the Mahayuti, this year, the figure is expected to cross at least 15%.'
The supplementary demands tabled on Monday are the second highest in the history of the state after the supplementary budget of ₹ 94,889 crore, tabled in July 2024. Tabled to fund the Mahayuti government's populist schemes such as Ladki Bahin ahead of the assembly polls last year, they had resulted in the supplementary budget tabled in FY 24-25 mounting to ₹ 1,37163 crore or 22.4% of the budget of that year.
The highest outlay in the supplementary budget this time is for the urban development department ( ₹ 15,465 crore), followed by public works ( ₹ 9,068 crore), rural development ( ₹ 4,733 crore) and social justice ( ₹ 3,799 crore). ₹ 11,043 crore has been allocated for matching grants for the 15th Finance Commission, ₹ 3,228 crore towards the waiver of stamp duty on metro projects, ₹ 2,241 crore as a secondary loan to metro projects, ₹ 2,183 crore for margin money loans to sugar factories and ₹ 2,150 crore towards matching grants to long-term, interest-free loans from the central government.
Former finance minister and NCP (SP) MLA Jayant Patil said that the supplementary demands had resulted in a further rise in the deficit. 'This is another record set by the state government after presenting a deficit budget of ₹ 45,891 crore,' he said. The deficit has now crossed ₹ 1.03 lakh crore and could exceed ₹ 1.5 lakh crore after the remaining two supplementary demand budgets are tabled in December and March next year. This is a sign of the government's failure to maintain fiscal balance.'
Patil said that most of the provisions in the supplementary demands were for contractors and agencies whose dues have been pending for months. 'The rise in the deficit results in backward classes and scheduled castes and tribes being deprived, as their funds are diverted for other purposes,' he said.
Rupesh Keer of the NGO Samarthan, which studies the state budget, said, 'It is an example of fiscal indiscipline, as the demands have been tabled just three months after the budget. Most of the provisions in the supplementary demands are for ongoing infrastructure projects, which were underway even when the budget was tabled, and could have been made in the budget itself. The state government must defer the allocation to keep the fiscal deficit low while presenting it.'