Bombay HC scraps Shiv Sena (UBT) MLA's plea alleging discriminatory allocation of funds by Maharashtra govt

Bombay High Court. File Pic

The Bombay High Court on Friday dismissed a petition filed by Shiv Sena (UBT) MLA Ravindra Waikar alleging discriminatory allocation of funds meant for development and infrastructure work in each constituency by the Eknath Shinde-led Maharashtra government.

A division bench of Justices S B Shukre and Rajesh Patil noted that the allocation of funds to MLAs for their constituencies was a state policy, and there cannot be a judicial review of the same in the absence of sufficient material to prove discrimination or lack of transparency.

Waikar, in his plea, had alleged that the state government was adopting a discriminatory attitude while allocating government funds to different constituencies for the development of infrastructure and basic civic amenities in slums.

He had submitted that the funds are made available to all MLAs equally in Maharashtra from the Maharashtra Local Development Funds, and Rs 11,420 lakh were allocated in 2022-23.

The legislator claimed that the funds allocated for slums situated in the constituencies represented by BJP MLAs were much more than the sum allocated for his constituency.

The bench, in its order, noted that substantial funds have been allocated for carrying out different works in constituencies belonging to parties other than the BJP.

It also held that the funds allocated to the petitioner's constituency were Rs 250 lakh, similar to several other constituencies.

"We do not see any arbitrariness or any instance of impermissible discrimination on the part of the state government in the allocation of the funds," the court said in its judgment.

The bench noted that the decision taken to accord sanction for carrying out different works in different localities and allocating funds for executing those works is an administrative function guided by the state policy.

It further held that judicial review of such an administrative function cannot be applied in cases where insufficient material is submitted.

The state government had opposed the plea and submitted that there was no arbitrariness or discriminatory attitude in sanctioning and allocating funds for the development of infrastructural facilities and basic amenities in slums.

It had informed the court that a committee of experts decides on the sanctioning of funds after considering the comparative needs of different localities, priority given to particular works, the general state of development and the status of basic facilities in those areas.

This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever.