Article 226: Writ Jurisdiction Can’t Be Exercised To Question Economic Or Fiscal Reforms — Supreme Court

This article reports a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court deciding that courts — via writ-jurisdiction under Article 226 — should not be used to challenge economic or fiscal policy decisions of municipal bodies or governments merely because they involve public interest or possible hardship. The Court overturned a High Court’s quashal of a municipal property-tax revision, ruling that revising property tax rates after a long interval was within the statutory competence of the municipal corporation. It held that unless the statutory procedure is violated, or the decision is arbitrary or perverse, courts must not re-evaluate the merits or wisdom of policy decisions. The judgment underscores the principle that financial autonomy and fiscal reforms of public bodies must be respected, unless procedural wrongdoing is shown, thereby limiting excessive judicial interference in socio-economic legislations and policies.