1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. W.P.No. 5562/2006 Harishchandra Pawar vs. The State of Maharashtra, through its Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Mr. Amol Mardikar, amicus curiae. Mrs. Dangre, Addl. G.P. For respondent. Coram : B.H. Marlapalle and A.H. Joshi, JJ. Dated : 22nd October, 2008. Heard Mr. Amol Mardikar, learned amicus curiae. The petitioner claims to be a social worker and human rights activist at Washim. It appears that on a Newspaper report published in the Time of India (Mumbai edition) on 22.10.2006 he was concerned with the plight of the persons engaged for work under the Maharashtra Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and, therefore, he has filed this petition praying for directions to increase the wages of EGS workers as well as their monthly pension and unemployment allowance. In addition, he has prayed for directions to the respondents to impose professional tax on all the members of the 2 legislature and to collect the same from their salary on par with the Government employees. The second prayer amounts to amending the Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act, 1977 and, therefore, it is not a subject matter which falls within the ambit of our powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is in the exclusive domain of the State Legislature to amend the said Act. So far as the first prayer is concerned, Mrs. Dangre, the learned Addl. G.P. has placed before us a copy of the notification dated 14.3.2007 issued by the Government of Maharashtra under the Maharashtra Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and the wages payable have been enhanced from Rs. 45 and Rs. 51/- to Rs. 66/- to Rs. 72/- per day in the respective zones. The State of Maharashtra has been divided in four different zones and the wage revision would be from 14.3.2007. In so far as the prayer for revision in unemployment allowance to the agricultural labour or to the EGS worker is concerned, it is for the State Government to decide the same as a matter of policy 3 and the same issue is beyond the scope of our jurisdiction. The petition is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE patle.