Background of the Case
The petitioners, Mahesh Kumar Yadav and his spouse, entered into an inter-caste marriage and applied for benefits under the Dr. Savita Ben Ambedkar Inter-Caste Marriage Help Scheme in January 2018. This scheme, initiated by the Rajasthan government, aims to promote social integration by providing financial incentives to inter-caste couples, particularly those involving a Scheduled Caste partner. At the time of their application, the scheme offered a total incentive of ₹5 lakh, with half disbursed immediately for household necessities and the remainder placed in a fixed deposit accessible after eight years of marriage.
Unbeknownst to the couple, their application was automatically rejected due to unspecified defects. They remained unaware of this rejection until July 2023, when an inquiry under the Right to Information Act revealed the status of their application. Subsequently, they issued a legal notice to the authorities, seeking permission to rectify the application defects. However, the authorities declined, citing the couple's failure to address the defects within the stipulated one-month period, leading to the automatic dismissal of their application.
Court's Analysis and Judgment
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand presided over the case, focusing on whether the petitioners should be allowed to rectify their application's defects despite the significant delay. The court acknowledged the couple's lack of awareness regarding the application's status and the procedural requirements for rectification. Emphasizing the scheme's objective to promote inter-caste marriages and social integration, the court granted the petitioners the liberty to submit a detailed application in the prescribed format, rectifying all previously identified defects. The court directed that if the petitioners submit the corrected application within one month, the authorities must review and decide on it within three months, issuing a reasoned order. If found eligible, the couple should receive the scheme's benefits.
Implications of the Judgment
This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring that procedural lapses do not impede access to welfare schemes, especially those designed to promote social equity. By allowing the couple to rectify their application after a considerable delay, the court highlighted the importance of substantive justice and the need to facilitate, rather than hinder, access to beneficial schemes. The decision also serves as a reminder to administrative authorities to ensure that applicants are adequately informed about procedural requirements and the status of their applications, promoting transparency and fairness in the implementation of welfare schemes.
Conclusion
The Rajasthan High Court's decision in this case reflects a compassionate and pragmatic approach to justice, prioritizing the scheme's social objectives over rigid adherence to procedural timelines. By granting the couple an opportunity to rectify their application, the court reinforced the principle that welfare schemes should be accessible and that procedural hurdles should not thwart the realization of social justice goals.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.