Whether a High Court can compel a state government to adopt a uniform policy when the state claims it has unfettered discretion to choose its own policy course on a subject within its legislative domain.
Aaj ki debate ka motion hai: 'State Government Has Absolute Discretion To Choose Its Own Policy Course' — yani kya ek State Government apni neeti banana mein bilkul swatantra hai, ya uspar kuch constitutional seemayen laagu hoti hain? Yeh ek bahut mahatvapurna sawaal hai jo hamari federal structure aur nagrik adhikaron dono ko chhoota hai — main chahti hoon ki dono taraf ke counsel is par apne vichar rakhein. Counsel Aarav, aap pehle apna paksh rakhein.
My lord, main yeh clearly kehna chahta hoon ki State Government ko apni policy choose karne ka poora adhikar hai — yeh federalism ka mool siddhant hai, aur iska seedha matlab yeh hai ki koi bhi central directive ya judicial preference uss discretion ko replace nahi kar sakti. Har State ki apni geographi, apni janata, apni zarooraten alag hoti hain — isliye ek hi policy sabpe thopna logically aur constitutionally dono taraf se galat hai. Main maanta hoon ki yeh absolute discretion koi anarchy nahi, balki ek zimmedaar, elected government ka voh adhikar hai jis par janata ne apna bharosa rakha hai — aur usi bharose ka samman karna is motion ka asli takaza hai.
My lord, paksh ki yeh dalil ki State Government ko apne policy course chunne mein 'absolute discretion' hai — yeh ek khatra hai, ek sanvidhanik bhool hai. Koi bhi discretion — chahe State ki ho ya Centre ki — absolute nahi hoti; har discretion ke upar sanvidhan, fundamental rights, aur judicial review ka pehara hota hai. Main aaj yeh samjhane ki koshish karungi ki 'policy freedom' aur 'unchecked absolute power' mein ek bahut bada, bahut zaroori fark hai — aur is fark ko bhulana loktantra ke liye ghatak hai.
My Lord, vipaksh kehta hai ki State Government ka policy discretion absolute hai — lekin yeh tark ek dangerous fallacy hai. Federalism aur democratic accountability ka poora structure is premise par tika hai ki koi bhi discretion — chahe State ki ho ya Centre ki — constitution ke framework ke bahar nahi ja sakti; fundamental rights, directive principles, aur legislative competence ye sab usi discretion ko bound karte hain. Main yahan koi specific authority cite nahi kar sakta kyunki is turn mein koi verified authority supply nahi ki gayi — lekin principle bilkul clear hai: 'absolute' discretion ka dava sunne mein achha lagta hai, haqiqat mein yeh rule of law ko hollow kar deta hai.
My lord, Aarav sahab ne 'discretion' ka jo dono haath faila ke swagat kiya, woh asal mein ek bahut badi chook hai — kyunki discretion ka matlab aniyantrit satta nahi hoti, aur jab State apni hi policy ke naam par constitutional zimmedari se munh fera le, to woh 'choice' nahi, woh abdication hai. Main yahan koi specific authority cite nahi kar sakti, lekin principle bilkul saaf hai: federal structure mein State ki policy-swatantrata ek conditioned freedom hai, conditions jo Constitution khud laagoo karta hai — aur is shart ko 'absolute' kehna us hi Constitution ka apamaan hai jis par yeh poora shaasan tika hua hai.
Ek taraf ka tark tha ki State Government ko apni policy chunne mein poori azadi hai — kyunki janata ne unhe mandate diya hai aur development ke raaste state ko khud tay karne chahiye. Doosri taraf ka tark tha ki yeh azadi 'absolute' nahi ho sakti — constitutional limitations, fundamental rights, aur judicial review ka daayra hamesha baana rehta hai. Main kisi ko jeeta ya haara nahi kehti, lekin meri balanced legal suggestion yeh hai: State ko policy discretion zaroor milni chahiye, lekin woh discretion reasonable, non-arbitrary, aur constitutionally bounded honi chahiye — citizens ke molik adhikaron se takraane wali koi bhi policy judicial scrutiny se baahar nahi ho sakti. Ab main citizens se request karungi ki woh is debate ko rate karen aur apni raay zaahir karen!