From Our Bureau
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court onSC DEBATE SHIFTS TO FREEBIES VS WELFARE: HEARING NEXT MONDAY Wednesday said it cannot stop the political parties from making promises as the issue of freebies is complicated. Yet, it asked the lawyers to suggest steps by Saturday evening to let it decide some remedy over the next one week.
It was hearing a plea filed by Tamil Nadu’s ruling party DMK which challenged the definition of freebies saying that welfare schemes introduced by a state government cannot be dubbed as a freebie.
The top court asked all the parties to give their suggestions by Saturday evening and scheduled the matter for further hearing the next Monday on August 22. Chief Justice of India N V Ramana has just next week to decide the matter since he is due for retirement on August 26.
He posed a question on what constitutes right promises. “Can we describe the promise of free education as a freebie,” he asked.
The concern right now is what is the right way of spending public money. Some people say money is wasted, some say it is welfare. The issues are getting increasingly complicated. You give your opinions, ultimately, after debate and discussion, we’ll decide,” the CJI said.
On August 10, the top court had said that promising and distributing freebies by political parties during elections is a “serious issue” and an amount has to be spent on infrastructure etc.
In an oral observation, CJI Ramana, who headed a Bench comprising Justices J K Maheshwari and Hima Kohli, said issues raised during the hearing of petitions against freebies promised by political parties during the elections is getting “increasingly complicated.”
“Can we describe the promise of free education as a freebie? Can free drinking water, free units of electricity be termed as freebies,” he asked, wondering whether free electronics like laptops and mobiles can be described as welfare.
“Some say money is wasted. Some say it is welfare. The issue is getting increasingly complicated,” the CJI said and cited the example of schemes such as MNREGA,
Senior advocate P Wilson, representing the DMK party which has impleaded in the case, said a welfare scheme introduced by a state government cannot be judged to be classified as a freebie.
He said he PIL, against the freebies, will frustrate the objectives of the Directive Principles of State poliy and objected to the Court’s proposal to set up an expert committee to examine the issue of the freebies.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, submitted, “If our understanding of social welfare is to distribute everything for free, then I am sorry to say…it is an immature understanding”.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, a Delhi BJP leader and Supreme Court lawyer, complained that DMK’s impleadment application was not served on the petitioner, instead it was given to the media. The bench said this should not be used for publicity and it should be ensured that parties are supplied with copies of applications.
On the top court’s anvil is a plea by advocate Upadhyay to issue directions to the Centre and the Election Commission against irrational freebies promised by the political parties to induce voters during the polls.
