Telangana High Court Revives Wedding Grants
A Telangana High Court division bench has stayed a single judge's order that halted the state's Kalyana Lakshmi and Shaadi Mubarak welfare schemes
A division bench of the Telangana High Court has reinstated two major state welfare schemes. The bench stayed a previous single judge's order that had stalled the Kalyana Lakshmi and Shaadi Mubarak programs.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin, issued the direction on Tuesday. The ruling came after hearing an appeal filed by principal secretaries of six key state departments.
These officials challenged the single judge's order that blocked implementation of the schemes through seven Government Orders. The original writ petition was filed by High Court practicing advocate Vijaya Gopal.
Legal Challenge to Schemes
Advocate Vijaya Gopal's contention was that the two schemes were being implemented solely through executive orders. He argued these orders had considerable impact on the state economy but lacked constitutional validity or legal sanctity.
He maintained the Government Orders had no legislative backing. The petitioner also argued that the single judge's order was merely an interim direction passed in an interlocutory application of the writ petition. Therefore, he claimed there could not be an appeal against it.
Government's Defense
Advocate General A. Sudershan Reddy presented the state's arguments. He informed the court that the two schemes have been in place since 2014. According to the Advocate General, the petitioner was neither a beneficiary nor negatively affected by either scheme.
The plea was not maintainable, he argued, because the petitioner could not explain how he suffered due to the schemes. Reddy also referenced a Supreme Court verdict. He stated the apex court had lauded different state governments for implementing welfare schemes for the benefit of unmarried women from marginalised sections.
Judicial Scrutiny
During proceedings, Chief Justice Singh posed a specific question to the petitioner's advocate. Referring to the argument that the schemes lacked legal sanctity, the CJ sought to know if the Comptroller and Auditor General had ever remarked in an audit report that the funds released had no constitutional validity.
The advocate replied that this aspect was outside the domain of the CAG. Following these arguments, the division bench decided to stay the single judge's order. The schemes, which provide financial assistance for the marriages of women from disadvantaged communities, can now continue.
The government departments that filed the appeal represent Backward Classes, Scheduled Caste Development, Scheduled Tribes Welfare, Minorities Welfare, Women and Child Welfare, and Finance. Their collective challenge has temporarily overturned the legal block on the popular programs.
