The Supreme Court questioned states' financial priorities, highlighting funds allocated for welfare schemes like Ladli Behna Yojana, pre-election promises, and freebies while citing financial constraints in paying judges' salaries and pensions.
Attorney General R. Venkataraman raised concerns over rising pension bills, while Amicus Curiae K. Parameshwar emphasized better pay for judges to ensure a diverse judiciary.
This discussion emerges amid ongoing petitions challenging pre-election freebies, with the court yet to review its 2013 Subramaniam Balaji verdict, which upheld welfare distributions aligned with Directive Principles of State Policy.
AnviBookmark