The term “freebie” should not be confused with actual welfare measures, the Supreme Court said, adding that there is a distinct distinction between television sets, consumer electronics and welfare offerings. It further said that political parties and individuals cannot be stopped from doing so. Electoral promises aimed at fulfilling the constitutional mandate.
“We should all remember the good old adage: ‘There is no free lunch”, the top court said, adding that “the concern is about the right way to spend public money”.
“There has to be a difference between offers of jewellery, television sets, free consumer electronics and genuine welfare offers. A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana said that the promise of free coaching for vocational courses cannot be compared with the promise of free white stuff.
And referring to the Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, the SC observed that voters are not looking for freebies, “given an opportunity, they will look for respectable earnings.”
On the issue of regulating freebies announced during elections, the bench, also comprising Justices JK Maheshwari and Hema Kohli, said it is “getting increasingly complicated” and fixed the PIL for hearing from all stakeholders. Time asked him to advise on the proposed panel. on 22 August.
He said the expression ‘freebie’ should not be confused with actual welfare measures” and gave examples to differentiate between freebies and “actual welfare offers”.
“As some of you have rightly pointed out, Article 38(2) of the Constitution empowers the State to ‘attempt to reduce inequalities in income, and status, facilities and opportunities not only among individuals, but also among people. Attempts to eliminate inequalities in groups of people living in different regions or engaged in different occupations.
“You cannot prevent a political party or individual from making promises for the purpose of fulfilling this constitutional mandate when elected to power. The question is what exactly qualifies as a valid promise,” the CJI said.
“Can the promise of providing free and compulsory education to all be called freebies,” the bench asked.
“Can we describe the promise of subsidies on electricity, seeds and fertilizers to small and marginal farmers to make agriculture profitable? Can we describe the promise of providing free and universal health care as a freebie? Can we call the promise of providing safe drinking water free of cost to every citizen a freebie.”
Giving another example, the CJI asked whether the promise of providing some minimum essential units of electricity to the needy free of cost could be kept.
“I don’t think voters are looking for freebies. Given an opportunity, they’ll look for respectable earnings. We have examples of schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, which offered respectable earnings and the public in rural India. also created property.”
catch all business News, market news, today’s fresh news events and breaking news Updates on Live Mint. download mint news app To get daily market updates.