MLA's PIL To Release Funds For Constituency Not Maintainable, Can Raise Issue In Assembly Or Before Govt: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation filed by Dasarahalli Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) S Muniraju, belonging to Bharatiya Janata Party, seeking a direction to the state government to release an amount of Rs 78 crore for carrying out the developmental work in his constituency.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind said “Petitioner herein is an elected representative, he is an MLA, it is always open for petitioner to flag such issues before the house or before the Government and its competent authorities. Filing a writ petition in the nature of a PIL and seeking relief on such scores would not be said to be justified, no such PIL can be entertained.”

The counsel for the petitioner argued that he had sent six representations this year for the release of the amount. We have sent so many representations where do we go now milords. Roads and buildings are in a dilapidated condition. The potholes on the roads are so deep that it has become dangerous to travel on roads in Dasarahalli. If a two wheeler rider goes and falls he might have to be hospitalised, it was said.

The court on going through the records said that the kind grievance sought to be placed was not fit to be entertained by way of a PIL. It said that the sanctioning of grant modification, the extent thereof, cancellation, modification, deduction or enhancement of grant to be given to the constituent assemblies and for the betterment of people of assemblies, would lie entirely in the domain of the elected government.

It added “As to what grant is to be sanctioned for a particular assembly or constituency or part of the area of the state is a decision entirely to be taken by the Executive. It is essentially a policy decision of the popular government. These are the decisions essentially to be taken and approved by the cabinet.”

Dismissing the plea, the court held that the decision-making process was guided by considerations, many of which cannot be subjected to any judicially manageable criteria.

"The popular government is the best judge for taking care of the needs and interests of Assembly constituencies, people and citizens. Invoking public interest jurisdiction of the court in such matters and in such spheres cannot be said to be well conceived," it concluded.

Case Title: S Muniraju And State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 16180/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 323

Appearance: Advocate VIJETHA R NAIK for Petitioner.

AGA Niloufer Akbar for Respondents.