Cancel projects started by previous governments, but not liquor policy: Madras HC
The Madras High Court on Saturday said there are instances of governments abandoning welfare projects initiated by previous governments, but the prohibition policy remained untouched for several decades. Justice R Suresh Kumar observed that in some areas, all the governments in Tamil Nadu for several decades have consistently taken certain policy decisions, irrespective of the political system in support of the previous government.
Though some such decisions were detrimental to the welfare of the people and the interest of the society at large, the subsequent governments did not give up such a policy, as their eyes were on the revenue of the exchequer, the judge said. Justice Kumar observed while dismissing two writ petitions of AK Sendrayan seeking quashing of Government Orders (GOs) of 2021 of the ruling DMK reversing the previous AIADMK government’s decision to set up a state-level training institute at Yercaud. and consequently directed to continue it. Construction work in one place.
“For example, this Court may point out that, for the past nearly five decades, with regard to the prohibition policy, several successive governments have been consistently and consistently following the same prohibition policy, whereby the states either TASMAC through or through a state agency has made available liquor to the people at their most convenient way and place,” the judge said. Justice Kumar further observed, “… such prohibition policy decision is certainly harmful and harmful to the people at large in this state and also against the development of the state. These successive governments have given equal prohibition to the people. The only reason we continue to follow the policy is because it is a huge revenue source for the government.” Conversely, the judge also referred to the construction of a new assembly and secretariat building in Chennai’s Omandurar Government Estate in 2011 by the then DMK government at a cost of over Rs 1,100 crore. The successive AIADMK government scrapped the proposal and instead set up a multi-specialty hospital in the building. And it was upheld by a division bench of this court, Justice Kumar pointed out.
The judge said that though such policy decisions are detrimental to the interests of the people, it cannot be questioned through judicial review. “Therefore, the challenge raised in the present writ petitions, which questioned the order of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies dated July 28, 2021 and a GO dated November 9, 2021, is not preferable to any plausible reason in the eyes of law. is kept. Interfere with the said decisions taken through the policy of the Government through judicial review,” the judge said.
Though there is an allegation of a legal malpractice or political malpractice on the part of the petitioner, those reasons are either not available in the matter or cannot be taken as a ground to interfere with the policy decision taken by the Government, because The state requires that only the best decisions should be taken by a democratically elected government, the judge noted. Whether the state requires a state level institution or a national level institution and such institution should be located at ‘A’ or ‘B’ or ‘C’, is to be decided only by the democratically elected government , and not court by it, he added.
Therefore, this Court does not wish to interfere with the decision taken by the present Government, which is reflected in the impugned communication as well as in the GO, the Judge added and dismissed the petitions. Before recusing from the matter, Justice Kumar gave some suggestions to the government to follow or keep in mind while reviewing the decisions taken by the previous governments.
In this regard, even an alternative proposal for the best utilization of funds already spent may not be the full and expected utilization for which the project was originally envisioned and implemented. Just because the previous government was from a different political system and the present one is from a different political system, there is no need to review all the decisions taken by the previous government.
However, some decisions taken by the previous government, if it is not good for the welfare of the people or the society at large, those decisions may be reviewed and alternative administrative solutions may be given, the judge said.
Read all the latest news, breaking news and IPL 2022 live updates here.