December 21, 2024
Bombay High Court to Hear PIL Against Maharashtra Government’s Welfare Schemes
High Court Judiciary

Bombay High Court to Hear PIL Against Maharashtra Government’s Welfare Schemes

Aug 2, 2024

Last Updated on August 2, 2024 by News Desk

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Bombay High Court seeking to quash the Maharashtra Government’s Mukhya Mantri Ladki Bahin Yojana (Chief Minister’s Beloved Sister Scheme) and Mukya Mantri Yuva Karya Prashikshan Yojna (Chief Minister’s Youth Employment Skill Training Scheme). The division bench, consisting of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar, has scheduled the hearing for Tuesday.

The Ladki Bahin scheme, established by a Government Resolution on June 28, 2024, aims to provide financial assistance of Rs. 1,500 per month to women from economically weaker backgrounds. Targeting women aged 21 to 60 with an annual income below Rs. 2.5 lakh, the scheme has an annual budget of Rs. 4,600 crores. The Yuva Karya scheme offers stipends ranging from Rs. 6,000 to Rs. 10,000 per month to youth aged 18 to 35, providing technical training to reduce unemployment in the state.

The petitioner argues that the allocation for these schemes will place a significant burden on the State’s finances, potentially crippling the budget. They claim that tax revenue should be used for infrastructure development, including building schools and hospitals, rather than these welfare schemes. The petition describes these initiatives as discriminatory towards taxpayers and alleges political motives behind their introduction, given the upcoming legislative assembly elections in October 2024.

The petitioner asserts that cash benefits are equivalent to bribery or gifts to voters, designed to secure votes for the current government. They argue that these schemes constitute undue influence and bribery, punishable under Sections 171B and 171C of the Indian Penal Code. Consequently, the petitioner requests the court to set aside these schemes and seeks a stay on the disbursement of benefits until a final judgment is reached.

The case, titled Naveed Abdul Saeed Mulla vs. State of Maharashtra & ors, raises significant questions about the use of public funds and the ethics of welfare schemes in the context of upcoming elections.

Written by — Athi Venkatesh AVD

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.