Delhi HC Questions MP/MLA Endorsement Rule for Women's Aid Scheme

The Delhi High Court on Monday directed the Delhi government to file an affidavit within 10 days explaining why women applying for financial assistance under the Delhi Lakshmi Yojana must obtain an endorsement from their local MP or MLA. The court's directive came during a hearing on a plea challenging the provision, which the petitioners argue turns a welfare entitlement into an instrument of political patronage.

A Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought the government's response to the requirement, which makes the endorsement of an elected representative mandatory for every applicant to the scheme. The scheme provides eligible women with a monthly financial assistance of ₹2,500. The Bench stated, “Let a short affidavit be filed by respondent No. 1 (Delhi government)... and indicate what objective they are seeking to achieve by adding this clause in the scheme.”

The plea was filed by former Congress councillor Abhishek Dutt and Aya Nagar councillor Vedpal Sheetal Chaudhary. They argued that the mandatory endorsement gives political representatives “unbridled discretion” and could be used to favour certain individuals, thereby undermining the scheme's nature as a social welfare measure. The petitioners contend that such a requirement is not only arbitrary but also potentially discriminatory, as it may exclude eligible women who lack access or connection to their elected representatives.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Delhi government, defended the provision. He submitted that similar schemes operate in other States and that such endorsement requirements exist across the country. He did not, however, provide a detailed justification for the clause during the hearing, leading the court to ask for a formal explanation.

The Delhi Lakshmi Yojana was launched on August 1 this year with an online registration portal. Under the scheme, women aged 21 to 60 with an annual family income of up to ₹2.5 lakh are eligible to apply. However, income-tax payers, government employees, and families with more than three children, ownership of a four-wheeler, or a member in government service are excluded from the benefit. The scheme is part of the Delhi government's broader social welfare initiatives aimed at providing financial support to women from economically weaker sections.

The High Court's intervention comes at a time when similar welfare schemes in other States have faced scrutiny over eligibility criteria and implementation mechanisms. The petitioners have argued that making a welfare scheme dependent on the discretion of elected representatives violates the principles of equality and transparency, as it could lead to differential treatment based on political affiliation. They have requested the court to strike down the endorsement requirement as unconstitutional.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for October 17, giving the Delhi government time to file its affidavit. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how welfare schemes are designed and implemented, particularly regarding the role of elected representatives in the distribution of benefits.

Observers note that the court's decision to seek a rationale indicates its concern over the potential for misuse of the provision. While the government maintains that the endorsement ensures verification and local oversight, critics argue that it burdens applicants and may deter genuine beneficiaries from applying. The case highlights the ongoing tension between administrative convenience and the right to equal access to welfare schemes.