Responding to the petitioner’s argument that funds out of a scheme approved by the Legislature could not be given for a purpose other than specified, the affidavit said the Constitution did make a provision for it.

The affidavit said under Article 205 of the Constitution of India, there was a provision for submitting supplementary demands before the Legislature after getting approval from the Governor, and the procedure would be followed in this case also.

The affidavit further said the Government could give any grant for a public purpose under Article 282 of the Constitution of India, even in cases where the state legislature did not have the power to legislate over a particular subject matter.

Chandra further said the grant to Sanawar School was given because: “It is a well known and reputed institution having the distinction of having maximum number of youngsters of Punjabi origin studying in the school since Independence. It was decided to give a grant of Rs 1 crore to this school, as financial assistance for its various new development works/ upgradation of existing infrastructure.”

At the very onset, Punjab Advocate-General Ashok Aggarwal verbally informed the Bench: “As assured by me, the cheque has not been encashed. It is lying with me.”

The Bench has now fixed the case for November 8 for arguments after taking the affidavit on record.

The petitioner had earlier contended that funds for the Punjab Nirman Programme had been sanctioned and approved by the Punjab Vidhan Sabha for specified development activities within the state and could not have been donated to Lawrence School by way of grant.