The Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, comprising Acting Chief Justice S V Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep V. Marne in the case of Vaibhav Padmakar Kulkarni v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors and Others has expounded that the Court would not direct the Government to make a policy in a particular manner as that would amount to encroaching upon the jurisdiction of the State Government conferred the Article 162 of the Constitution of India.
Facts of the Case
A PIL is filed with a prayer against State Government to grant financial aid to all victims of snake and scorpion bites who are residing in the State of Maharashtra without discrimination.
Submission of the Petitioner
The Counsel appearing on the behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the Government of Maharashtra is giving financial aid to the victims of snake/scorpion bites under Gopinath Mundhe Insurance Scheme only to farmers and their one blood relative whose name appears in the 7/12 extract.
He further submitted that on one hand the State of Maharashtra is providing financial aid to the farmers and their family members who succumb on account of snake bite, at the same time the persons like the Petitioner who catch the snakes/scorpion and get infected because of the same are not provided with any financial aid. The same is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Submission of the Respondent
The Counsel appearing on the behalf of the Respondent submitted that the financial aid is given for loss of human life or injury due to wild animals as per Government Resolution dated 23rd August 2022. The said benefit is extended only to land holding farmer and one member of the family.
Reasoning and Decision of the Court
The Bench heard both the parties and considered the submissions of the parties. The Court observed that to grant financial aid is a matter of policy decision to be taken by the State Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India.
On the question of discrimination raised by the petitioners, the Court opined that the policy framed for granting financial aid to the farmer and family members of the farmer who succumb on account of the snake bite would form a different class. The farmers are the ones who are in field. The separate provision is made for them. The purpose of taking within its fold the farmers who succumb to snake bite is that the farmers were already covered by the earlier Government Resolutions by which compensation is payable on account of the death or injury caused by wild animals. Considering the welfare of the farmers, the decision has been taken to extend the benefit of compensation even for snake bite.
Therefore, the Court disposed of the PIL and refrain itself for giving directions with regard to the fiscal policies of the State Government. The Court held that whether a particular scheme is to be applied to a particular group of persons is a policy decision that is to be under taken by the Government. The State Government under its wisdom has considered farmers to form a different class than the other citizens and the benevolent scheme has been floated for the farmers.
Case Details
Case:- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.107 OF 2022
Petitioner:- Vaibhav Padmakar Kulkarni
Respondent:- The State of Maharashtra & Ors
Counsel for the Petitioner - Mr. Anurag R. Kulkarni
Counsel for the Respondent - Mr. P.P. Kakade
Judge: Acting Chief Justice S V Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep V. Marne
Picture Source :
