PIL Filed Before Karnataka High Court to Examines Legality of Appointments to Panel Overseeing Congress’s Five Guarantees
(Judicial Quest News Network)
Bangalore 27, February, 2025.The Karnataka High Court, on Thursday, sought the state government’s response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the appointment of Congress party workers to the implementation panels overseeing the state’s five flagship guarantees.
A bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice MI Arun observed that if the petitioners’ allegations are accurate, it would reflect an undesirable situation, casting doubt on the fairness of the appointments. The court has scheduled the next hearing for March 27th.
The five guarantees in question were part of the Karnataka Congress party’s 2023 election manifesto and include:
- Gruha Jyoti: 200 units of free electricity for every household.
- Gruha Lakshmi: Rs. 2,000 per month to every woman head of a household.
- Anna Bhagya: Provision of food grains to all individuals below the poverty line.
- Yuvanidhi: Financial support for unemployed youth.
- Shakti: Free transport for women.
To ensure the smooth implementation of these initiatives, the state formed committees at the state, district, taluka, and BBMP (Brihat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palika) levels in January 2024. The subsequent orders from the government also detailed the remuneration for committee members.
Rajiv, a senior BJP leader and former MLA, has questioned the validity of the state’s orders. He contends that the appointments are politically motivated and have been handed to Congress party workers with limited qualifications or relevant experience. Rajiv argues that individuals who failed to make an impact in politics and lack the necessary technical or educational qualifications were appointed as vice-presidents of these key agencies. According to him, the appointments were made to benefit party loyalists who couldn’t succeed in politics.
Senior advocate Aruna Shyam, representing Rajiv, further argued that the appointment of Panna as the president of the implementation committee had been made arbitrarily, and that the position had been awarded cabinet rank by the state, a decision she described as both unnecessary and unjustified. Additionally, the appointments of vice presidents—SR Patil, Dr. Pushpa Amarnath, Meraj Khan, and Suraj Hegde—were questioned for lacking any merit or clear basis.
Rajiv’s legal counsel also criticized the cabinet status granted to the president of the committee and the vice presidents as being irrational and wasteful, calling it an unjustifiable expenditure of public funds. The next hearing in the case will take place on March 27, with the court urging the state to clarify its stance on the matter.
