Punjab & Haryana High Court Seeks State's Response On PIL Challenging "Mukhya Mantri Tirth Yatra Scheme"

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has sought the Punjab Government's response on Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed challenging the recently launched "Mukhya Mantri Tirth Yatra Scheme."

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Nidhi Gupta issued notice to the state government, on the plea filed by Parvinder Singh Kittna seeking stay on the scheme.

The Tirth Yatra scheme launched by the State Government reportedly aims to facilitate pilgrims to various holy places across the country and state.

The petition states that "it amounts to colossal wastage of funds by the State Government, by raising the debts and also from the taxes paid by the citizens." 

According to the scheme, the state will manage all arrangements for the pilgrims, including travel and lodging. Senior PCS Officers will act as Nodal Officers, who will visit the shrines in advance and will coordinate for making necessary arrangements for food, and accommodation in AC Dharamshalas and for facilitation of darshan, the plea adds.

It is exploitation of religious sentiments rather than fulfilling the government's responsibility to uplift community education and address other issues of social development, the petitioner stated

Reliance was also placed upon Union of India and others v. Rafique Shaikh Bhikan and another [and other connected matter], in which while examining the Haj Subsidy Scheme, the Supreme Court said, "We are of the view that Hajj Subsidy is something that is best done away with."

It further states that the Apex Court had further directed that the "amount of Haj Subsidy should be progressively reduced, so as to completely eliminate it within a period of 10 years from today (date of the judgment), and the Subsidy money may be more profitably used for the upliftment of the community, in education and other indices of social development."

In light of the above, the plea seeks a stay on the operation of the scheme.

While listing the matter for December 12, the Court directed the State to file an affidavit in response to the petition before the next date of hearing.

Advocate H.C Arora appeared for the petitioner.

Case Title: Parvinder Singh Kittna v. State of Punjab and others