Kochi, Jun 22 The Kerala High Court on Monday dismissed a PIL challenging the UDF government's Priyadarshini Scheme, which offers free travel for women and transgender persons on ordinary KSRTC buses.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V M held that the scheme was a policy decision of the government aimed at benefiting working-class women and found no grounds for interference.
The Public Interest Litigation was filed by Muhammed Firdouz, who described himself as a public-spirited citizen and taxpayer.
In his petition, Firdouz contended that the scheme was discriminatory and violated Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, as it provided free bus travel to women and transgender persons without any income ceiling, residency requirement or identified disadvantage that it sought to address.
The petitioner also claimed that the scheme would impose a burden on the public exchequer of around Rs 2 crore per day, amounting to nearly Rs 800 crore annually.
The PIL questioned the manner in which the policy was approved and the speed with which it was implemented.
Opposing the plea, the state government submitted that similar schemes were already being implemented in several states, such as, Delhi, Punjab, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Telangana and West Bengal.
After hearing both sides, the court observed that there was nothing in the scheme contrary to any statutory provision and dismissed the petition.
The Priyadarshini Scheme was one of the five major guarantees promised by the UDF during the Assembly election campaign.
After assuming office, the UDF government implemented the scheme, providing free travel for women and transgender persons on ordinary services operated by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation.
Kochi, Jun 22 The Kerala High Court on Monday dismissed a PIL challenging the UDF government's Priyadarshini scheme, which offers free travel for women and transgender persons on ordinary KSRTC buses.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V M held that the scheme was a policy decision of the government aimed at benefiting working-class women and found no grounds to interfere with it.
The PIL was filed by Muhammed Firdouz, who described himself as a "public-spirited citizen and taxpayer."
In his petition, Firdouz contended that the scheme was discriminatory and violated Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, as it provided free bus travel to women and transgender persons without any income ceiling, residency requirement or identified disadvantage that it sought to address.
The petitioner claimed that the scheme would impose a burden on the public exchequer of around Rs 2 crore per day, amounting to nearly Rs 800 crore annually.
The PIL questioned the manner in which the policy was approved and the speed with which it was implemented.
Opposing the plea, the state government submitted that similar schemes were already being implemented in several states, such as Delhi, Punjab, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Telangana and West Bengal.
The court observed that it was the duty of the State to extend benefits, concessions and privileges to those in need and that welfare schemes formulated to advance the Directive Principles of State Policy could not be termed unconstitutional merely because they involved expenditure or special provisions permitted under Article 15(3) of the Constitution.
"Contentions to the contrary put forth by the petitioner on the premise that the government order lacks a policy study and empirical data collection are unsustainable," the court said.
The court rejected the petitioner's contention regarding the scheme's financial burden, noting that the government order specifically provided that the entire expenditure would be borne by the state and that KSRTC's contractual commitments and day-to-day operational expenses would be protected.
The court said it was not for the judiciary to sit in judgment over the prudence of a policy decision taken by the government and held that the challenge to the scheme on financial grounds was unsustainable.
Noting that the petitioner had also taken exception to the fact that the initiative stemmed from a promise made in the election manifesto, the court said that if the scheme, as evolved, fell within the realm of fulfilling the Directive Principles of State Policy, it had limited jurisdiction to interfere with it.
"Petitioner has failed to point out any inherent unconstitutionality in the issuance and implementation of the government order," it said.
Senior advocate Jaju Babu and B S Swathi Kumar appeared for the Kerala government and the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation.
The Priyadarshini Scheme was one of the five major guarantees promised by the UDF during the Assembly election campaign.
After assuming office, the UDF government implemented the scheme, providing free travel for women and transgender persons on ordinary services operated by the KSRTC.
Muhammed Firdouz v. State of Kerala, (Kerala)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2928125
