New Delhi: In a setback to the Centre, the Supreme Court has dismissed a plea seeking a review of the verdict, which directed that IPS officers’ deputation in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) be reduced and asked for a cadre review to be carried out in six months.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a plea by the Centre seeking a review of the May 23 verdict of the apex court.
“We have carefully gone through the contents of the review petition and the papers appended therewith and are satisfied that no case for review of the judgment dated May 23, 2025 is made out,” the bench said.
The High Court’s order—passed earlier this year—had come in response to petitions highlighting the non-payment of wages to MGNREGA workers in the State. The scheme’s implementation had been halted in 2022 following allegations of large-scale embezzlement of funds.
While acknowledging that the Centre was within its rights to continue investigating those allegations, the High Court had ruled that such irregularities could not justify keeping the scheme suspended indefinitely. It directed the resumption of the implementation of the scheme prospectively from August 2025.
The High Court had observed, “The scheme of the Act does not envisage a situation where it would be put in the cold storage for eternity.”
It further noted, “The Central government has sufficient means to inquire into irregularities in the disbursement of wages. There can be a line drawn between the past actions and the future steps to be taken for implementation.”
The judgment stressed that allowing the program to restart was in the broader public interest, stating that such a move would “subserve the interest in which the Act was enacted.” The Court thus permitted the Centre to pursue its inquiry into misappropriation while ensuring that beneficiaries were not deprived of their livelihood guarantee.
Appearing for the Central government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued against the High Court order. On the other hand, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the West Bengal government, and senior advocate S. Muralidhar, appearing for the Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity—the petitioner before the High Court—defended the High Court’s reasoning, asserting that rural labourers could not be indefinitely deprived of work opportunities.
