Bombay High Court upholds Maharashtra's Ladki Bahin Yojana, junks PIL by CA

The Bombay High Court on Monday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the Maharashtra government's Mukhya Mantri's Majhi Laadki Bahin Yojana, a scheme that assures monthly cash benefits for women in Maharashtra..A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar observed that the taxpayers do not have a say in how tax revenues are utilized, as it falls within the government's policy domain."Tax is a compulsory exaction of money. It does not entail any service. The quid pro quo is available only in fees. Just because you are paying tax does not mean that you can say how it needs to be used," the court observed.The petition was filed by a Navi Mumbai-based chartered accountant, Naveed Abdul Saeed Mulla challenging the scheme which promises ₹1,500 per month to all women aged 21-60 years who are married, widowed, divorced, abandoned, or without support. The petitioner argued that the scheme along with the Mukhyamantri Yuva Karya Prashikshan Yojana, an internship scheme for unemployed youth, imposes an additional burden on taxpayers and is akin to 'bribery' ahead of the upcoming assembly elections..The plea further claimed that the ₹4,600 crore cost of the scheme is a significant burden on a State already in debt. Advocate Owais Pechkar, representing the petitioner, argued that the budgetary allocation could be better used for infrastructure projects like building roads or highways. However, the Court maintained that judicial intervention was not warranted based solely on differing opinions on budget allocations, The Court emphasised that arguments should be made on legal grounds."We may make it very clear to you that you have to argue within the legal contours. You don't have the ground to say that money should be used in a particular way since you are a taxpayer. Budget allocation can't be challenged. Particular schemes may be more beneficial, but that does not confer any power on us to interfere," the Court stated.Pechkar noted that the State's finance department had expressed concerns about the Ladki Behan Yojna given the State's financial condition, but the cabinet approved it with clear political motives, as State assembly polls are due in October 2024. .The bench responded that the allocation was made through a budgetary process, a legislative exercise beyond judicial intervention. The Court also highlighted that Article 15 of the Constitution permits the State to implement social welfare measures for women. The bench noted an intelligible differentia, as only women below the income group of ₹2.5 lakhs would be eligible for the scheme.Advocate General Birendra Saraf, representing the State government, argued that the schemes comply with the Directive Principles of State Policy, which mandate the State to undertake social welfare measures. He cited Articles 38, 39, 41, 46, and 47 of the Constitution to support the schemes and pointed out that sufficient safeguards were in place to disqualify those receiving benefits under other schemes. After hearing both the parties, the Court dismissed the PIL.