The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed strong disapproval of the growing trend of announcing freebies before elections, arguing that such practices discourage people from working and fostering self-reliance. The observations came from a bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih while hearing a case concerning the right to shelter for homeless individuals in urban areas.
Justice Gavai remarked that excessive distribution of free benefits was creating an over-dependence on government support. "Unfortunately, because of these freebies... the people are not willing to work. They are getting free rations. They are getting amounts without doing any work," he stated. The bench underscored the long-term consequences of such policies, stressing that instead of providing continuous financial and material handouts, efforts should be made to ensure that beneficiaries become active contributors to the nation’s economic growth.
"We quite appreciate your concern for them, but would it not be better to make them a part of the mainstream of society and permit them to contribute to the development of the nation?" the bench observed, emphasizing the need for policies that encourage employment, skill development, and economic participation rather than reliance on state assistance.
During the hearing, Attorney General R Venkataramani, representing the Centre, informed the court that the government was finalizing an urban poverty alleviation mission. This mission, he stated, aims to address multiple socio-economic concerns, including the provision of shelter for the urban homeless and other essential welfare measures. In response, the bench directed the Attorney General to verify from the Centre within how much time the mission would be implemented and made applicable to those in need.
The Supreme Court’s remarks come amid an ongoing national debate over the impact of populist measures on economic productivity and workforce participation. While welfare schemes are essential for social security, there is growing concern that excessive reliance on government assistance may disincentivize labor participation and economic independence. Critics argue that short-term electoral gains should not take precedence over sustainable economic policies that promote skill development, employment, and entrepreneurship.
The court has scheduled the matter for a further hearing after six weeks, signaling its intention to closely monitor the government’s approach to tackling urban poverty and homelessness. This development is expected to reignite discussions on balancing welfare policies with economic growth strategies, as policymakers seek to ensure that social security measures do not undermine workforce engagement and national development.
