Senior counsel Milind Sathe, appearing for the government, opposed the petitions, saying it was the states discretion how much land or money should be allotted for a memorial. The government also argued that its decision to allot land or money for a monument could not be Woodworking Drilling Equipment questioned in court. Such state actions cannot be questioned in a court of law," Mr Sathe said.Advocate Uday Warunjikar, who also appe-ared for one of the petitioners, claimed that the entire machinery was being mobilised for a private individual. The decision to allot the money was taken earlier this week.. "Whether a person deserves a memorial or statue is up to the state government.The government told the court that it had discretionary powers to make such a provision, and the allotment for the memorial was well within its powers.When the PILs, challe-nging the decision to convert the mayor’s bu-ngalow at Shivaji Park into a museum, came up for hearing Thurs-day, the petitioners sou-ght the court’s permission to amend their pr-ayers in the petition as they also wanted to challenge the governme-nt’s decision to allot Rs 100 crore for the project.Mumbai: The state government Thursday justified its decision to allocate Rs 100 crore for the proposed Bal Thackeray memorial while replying to a PIL filed in the Bombay high court.Advocate Pradeep Havnur, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the amount could be used for other important issues that the state was facing