[ad_1]
Supreme Court has said that courts cannot direct states to implement particular schemes
New Delhi:
The scope of judicial review in examining policy matters of the government is very limited and the courts cannot direct the States to implement a particular policy or scheme on the grounds that a “better, fairer or wiser” option is available, the Supreme Court has said.
The observation came while disposing of a PIL seeking formulation of a scheme on setting up of community kitchens to combat hunger and malnutrition.
The top court refused to pass any direction in the matter observing that the National Food Security Act (NFSA) and other welfare schemes are being implemented by the Centre and states.
A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal said legality of the policy, and not the wisdom or soundness of the policy, would be the subject of judicial review.
“It is well settled that the scope of judicial review in examining the policy matters is very limited. The courts do not and cannot examine the correctness, suitability or appropriateness of a policy, nor are the courts advisors to the executive on the matters of policy which the executive is entitled to formulate. The courts cannot direct the States to implement a particular policy or scheme on the grounds that a better, fairer or wiser alternative is available,” the bench said.
The top court said it was open to states and union territories to ensure implementation of alternative welfare schemes.
“When the National Food Security Act (NFSA) with a ‘right based approach’ for providing food and nutritional security, is in force and when other welfare schemes under the said Act have also been framed and implemented by the Union of India and the States, to ensure access to adequate quantity of quality food at affordable prices to people to live a life with dignity, we do not propose to give any further direction in that regard.
“We have not examined whether the concept of community kitchens is a better or wiser alternative available to the States to achieve the object of NFSA, rather we would prefer to leave it open to the States/UTs to explore such alternative welfare schemes as may be permissible under the NFSA,” the bench said.
The top court’s judgement came on a PIL filed by social activists Anun Dhawan, Ishann Singh and Kunajan Singh seeking directions to all states and union territories to formulate a scheme for community kitchens to combat hunger and malnutrition.
The plea had alleged that many children under the age of five die every day due to hunger and malnutrition and this condition was violative of various fundamental rights, including the right to food and life of citizens.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
[ad_2]
Source link
