Hyderabad: State has power to determine status
“It is the prerogative of the state to formulate a policy for the benefit of its own people. While formulating the policy, the state government is empowered to fix certain criteria to extend the benefit to people who deserve it,” said Gandra Mohan Rao, a Hyderabad High Court advocate.
He said after the merger of Telangana with AP, and after Hyderabad was made the capital, several people migrated from Andhra and Rayalaseema to the city.
“Since Telangana has now been separated there is no meaning in extending this benefit to the people who have settled here by virtue of their employment or businesses. It is for the AP government to take care of them,” he added.
Mr Rao said, “The fee reimbursement scheme is state-sponsored. The Centre has nothing to do with it. The state government has every right to decide who the beneficiaries of the scheme are.”
“The state government has categorically said 1956 is the cut off year only for the fee reimbursement, not for any other purpose. If any one wants to put this up for judicial scrutiny, let them do it,” Mr Rao said.
He is of the opinion that courts have limited jurisdiction in matters concerned with policy decisions of the state governments. “The Constitution has empowered state governments to make their own policies for the welfare of their people,” he said.
Telangana state’s decision unconstitutional
Former Advocate-General and senior advocate S. Ramachandra Rao termed the proposed decision of the Telangana government regarding nativity of a citizen as unconstitutional.
He said the Constitution has already derived the nativity of a citizen through Article 14, 16, and Article 14 specifies equality before law. As per the Article, the state shall not deny any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India, prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, he added.
Mr Rao said the Constitution did not allow any state to make laws on its whims and fancies.
Constitutional Courts are empowered to scrutinise any law or a policy made by the state to test whether it is within the meaning of the parameters laid down by the Constitution.
He said taking 1956 as the cut off year to extend the fee reimbursement benefit is meaningless. Mr Rao said that as long as Article 371 (D) is in force, the T government has no power to change any of the existing criteria for the purpose of employment and education.
Now, if the Telangana government wants to make changes in any of its recruitments or admissions into educational institutions it has to put pressure on the Centre for the deletion of Article 371 (D), he added.
