The petitioner challenged a government policy banning the utilization of performance grants. The court held that such budgetary and policy decisions are within the State Government's domain. It declined jurisdiction under Article 226 as the matter involved budgetary implications and policy matters.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 1
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20200 of 2019
Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S. N. Shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and perused the record.
By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought relief in the nature of mandamus directing the Director of Panchayati Raj, U.P., Luckonw to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 27.05.2019. In the said representation the petitioner has raised plea that the Government has come up with the policy decision for providing performance grant in the bank account of 541 Gram Panchayat and after the amount was credited in their account, subsequently, a ban has been placed on 26.10.2017 regarding its utilization.
In the considered opinion of the Court, issues involving budgetary implications and relating to policy matters of the State, ordinarily be not gone into by the High Court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is within the domain of State Government to decide about the expenditure to be incurred and the heads in which it has to be spent. The Government has taken a policy decision to put a ban on a particular grant which has been issued for some reasons. It is only open for the State Government to take appropriate decision.
We decline, therefore, to interfere in the matter, leaving it open for the petitioner to pursue the remedy elsewhere if available in law.
The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed and the matter be consigned to record.
Order Date :- 8.8.2019 Nitin Verma
(Ajit Kumar, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere in the State Government's policy decision regarding the ban on performance grant utilization.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Brijesh Kumar Mishra
State Of U.P.
Ramesh Sinha
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
