Consequently, any dispute regarding entitlement to such allowance falls squarely within the constitutional bar and is not maintainable. The Court then examined the petitioner's argument that the Constitution (Twenty-Sixth Amendment) abolished the Malikhana allowance along with the privy purses. Distinguishing the two, the Court observed thus:"Therefore, we hold that the Privy Purse and Malikhana allowance are distinct and separate claims and operate in different spheres. In view of these findings, the High Court concluded that the writ petition was barred under Article 363, that the petitioner lacked locus standi, and that none of the reliefs sought could be granted. The petition was accordingly dismissed, with costs of ₹10,000 directed to be paid to the High Court Mediation Centre.