Supreme Court of India: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday raised concerns over the practice of providing free electricity irrespective of consumers’ financial status, pulling up the Tamil Nadu electricity board over its proposed scheme.
The apex court issued notice to the Centre and other parties on a plea related to the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government’s proposal to extend free electricity benefits.
Court Flags Impact of ‘Freebies’ on Economy
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant criticised the growing “freebies culture” adopted by states and political parties, observing that such measures could hamper economic development.
“The economic development of the nation will be hampered with this kind of largesse distribution. Yes, it is the State’s duty to provide. But the ones who are enjoying freebies… is it not something that should be looked at?” the CJI remarked.
He further questioned the sustainability of offering universal benefits without considering fiscal realities. “We know states where there is free electricity even if you are a big landlord… you keep lights on, machines on. If you want to have a facility, you pay for it. But this money which the State says it will pay now… Who will pay for it? This is the tax money,” he said.
The bench also noted that several states are already facing revenue deficits while continuing to announce large-scale welfare schemes.
Welfare Announcements Before Elections Questioned
The court observed that welfare schemes are often rolled out ahead of elections, raising broader concerns about fiscal discipline and policy intent.
“We are not on the Tamil Nadu context only. We are on the fact that why are schemes being announced just before elections. All political parties, sociologists need to revisit ideology. How long will this continue?” the CJI said.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi added that the issue extends beyond a single state. “It’s not one State we are talking about, it’s about all States. It is planned expenditure. Why don’t you make Budget proposals and give justification that this is my outlay on unemployment of people,” he observed.
The matter remains under consideration as the court examines the larger question of fiscal responsibility and welfare policy across states.
(Via Agency Inputs)
