Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Against Government Welfare Schemes
The Bombay High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought to quash two state government welfare schemes, namely the Mukhya Mantri Majhi Ladki Bahin Yojana and Mukhya Mantri Yuva Karya Prashikshan Yojana. The Ladki Bahin scheme aims to provide financial support to women between 21 and 60 years of age who are married, widowed, divorced, or without external support, offering them a monthly stipend of Rs 1500. On the other hand, the Yuva Karya Prashikshan Yojana proposes a monthly stipend for men between 18 and 35 years old.
During the court proceedings, petitioner Naveed Mulla’s advocate Owais Pechkar argued that tax revenue should be primarily utilized for infrastructure development such as roads, highways, and educational institutions. However, Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya questioned whether the court had the authority, under Article 226, to dictate the government’s spending priorities. The bench, which also included Justice Milind Borkar, emphasized that budget allocation is a part of the legislative process and thus may not be subject to judicial challenge. The judges further rejected Pechkar’s assertion that the Ladki Bahin scheme discriminates against women earning above Rs 2.5 lakh, noting that equality should be assessed among equals and that different income groups cannot be considered part of the same class.
The court highlighted the existence of welfare schemes that specifically target disadvantaged sections of society and stressed that Article 15 of the Indian Constitution enables the provision of support to various groups, including women. Additionally, the judges underscored that taxpayers do not have the authority to influence how tax revenue is spent, reiterating that such decisions rest with the government.
In response, Advocate General Birendra Saraf emphasized the presence of safeguards to ensure that only genuinely needy women benefit from the welfare scheme. He also clarified that the employment incentive scheme restricts the stipend to a maximum of 6 months, ensuring that once a beneficiary secures employment, the financial assistance ceases. Saraf further highlighted that these schemes align with the Directive Principles of State Policy, reflecting the government’s commitment to socio-economic welfare.
The High Court’s decision to uphold these welfare schemes underscores the government’s discretion in formulating and implementing policies aimed at addressing social and economic disparities, in accordance with constitutional provisions and legislative processes.
