HomeBusinessSuccessive governments cancel projects started by previous regimes, but not liquor policy:...

Successive governments cancel projects started by previous regimes, but not liquor policy: Madras HC MIGMG News


The Madras High Court said on Saturday that there have been cases in which successive governments have abandoned social welfare projects initiated by the former regime, but the ban policy has remained the same for several decades. Judge R Suresh Kumar noted in certain districts, that all successive governments for several decades in Tamil Nadu have consistently taken some political decisions which support the decisions of the previous government regardless of the political measure.

The judge pointed out that although some of these decisions were harmful to the welfare of the people and the interest of society as a whole, successive governments did not abandon such a policy, because they were looking at the revenues of the state treasury. Judge Kumar made this remark while rejecting two written petitions from G Sendrayan seeking to overturn the 2021 Government Orders (GOs) for the ruling DMK ruling that reverses AIADMK’s earlier decision to set up a statewide training institute in Yercaud and thus direct it to continue operating. Construction work in the same place.

Illustratively, this Court can point out that, in connection with the policy of prohibition, for nearly five decades, several successive governments have consistently and consistently pursued the same policy of prohibition, under which the State is either through licensees or through a government agency such as The judge said TASMAC made the liquor available to the people in the most convenient way and place for them.” Judge Kumar further said, “…this Prohibition policy decision is definitely harmful and detrimental to the people in general in this state and also against the growth of the state. The only reason these successive governments have prompted the people to continue following the same Prohibition policy is because it is a great source of income for the Government.” On the contrary, the judge also referred to the construction of a new building for the assembly and general secretariat at Omandurar Government Estate in Chennai at a cost of over Rs 1,100 crore in 2011 by the then DMK Government. Successive AIADMK governments canceled the proposal and instead set up a multi-specialty hospital on the premises. Judge Kumar noted that it was upheld by a sworn panel in this court.

The judge said that even these kinds of political decisions, while harmful to people’s interests, cannot be questioned through judicial review. “Therefore, the appeal lodged in present written petitions questioning the Order of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies dated July 28, 2021 and GO of November 9, 2021 is not in a better position for any reasonable cause in the eyes of the law to interfere with said decisions made through government policy, by reviewing Judicial”.

Although there is an allegation of legal misconduct or political bad taste on behalf of the petitioner, these reasons are either not available in this case or cannot be considered as grounds for interference in the political decision of the government, since the requirements of the state are at best decided by the government Democratically elected, the judge said. Whether the state requires a state-level institute or a national-level institute, and that kind of institute is best decided in place A, B or C only by the democratically elected government and not by this court added.

Therefore, this court does not want to interfere with the decision of the current government, which is reflected in the contested communication as well as the GO, the judge added and dismissed the petitions. Before separating from the case, Judge Kumar made some suggestions to the government to follow or take into consideration while reviewing the decision made by the previous dispensations.

In this regard, even an alternative proposal for the best benefit of the fund already expended may not be the full and foreseen use, which the project was originally designed and implemented. Just because the previous government was from a different political system and the current government is from a different political system, all the decisions made by the previous government need not be reconsidered.

However, the judge said that some of the decisions made by the previous government, if they were not good for the welfare of the people in general or society, these decisions can be reviewed and alternative administrative solutions can be offered.

Read all the latest news, breaking news and live updates for IPL 2022 here.



Most Popular