The Supreme Court has shown a mirror to the governments regarding the huge gap between the announcement of government schemes and their effective implementation. The court said that the government must think about the financial implications of any scheme before announcing it. The Court cited the Right to Education Act as a classic example, where a right has been made, but ‘where are the schools?’. A bench headed by Justice UU Lalit said this while hearing a plea seeking to develop infrastructure for providing legal aid to the abused women.
“We would advise you that whenever you come up with such plans or ideas, always keep in mind the financial implications,” the top court said. The bench also comprises Justice SR Bhat and Justice PS Narasimha. The bench told Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre, that the “classical example” of this is the Right to Education Act. The bench said, ‘You have created a right. Where are the schools? Therefore, schools have to be established by various authorities including municipalities, state governments etc. Where do they find teachers?’
The bench said that in some states there are ‘Shiksha Mitras’ and these persons are given around Rs 5,000 in lieu of regular payment. It said that when the court asks the state about it, they say there is budget constraint. The bench said, ‘You have to see in its entirety. Otherwise, it becomes mere jumlebaazi. At the outset of the hearing, Bhati told the bench that he has given a letter seeking some time to furnish the details as per the earlier direction of the court.
The apex court had in February asked the Center to file an affidavit, regarding the nature of central programmes/schemes to support efforts under the DV Act (Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005) by various states. Includes description. It also includes funding limits, conditions governing financial aid, and control mechanisms. During the hearing on Wednesday, Bhati told the bench that “a lot of progress has been made”. The bench asked the Additional Solicitor General to file a status report giving the details.