The Telangana High Court has raised uncomfortable but necessary questions over the constitutional validity of the state’s marriage assistance schemes.
While hearing petitions challenging the Kalyana Lakshmi and Shaadi Mubarak schemes, Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar questioned the legal authority under which public funds were being disbursed through executive orders and directed the government to explain the constitutional basis for the schemes.
The court also appeared unconvinced by the government’s priorities, noting that employee salaries and contractors’ bills were pending while welfare schemes continued to receive funding.
Whether the schemes ultimately survive judicial scrutiny is for the court to decide. But the observations have opened a much larger debate that extends beyond the legality of two welfare programmes.
A question of priorities
The issue is not whether governments should care for the poor. They must. The real question is whether a state that is itself struggling financially should continue expanding politically attractive giveaways while neglecting its core responsibilities.
Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy has himself publicly acknowledged the state’s financial distress. He has spoken of the government’s struggle to pay employees’ salaries on time and admitted that even raising fresh loans has become increasingly difficult because lenders are reluctant.
If the treasury is under such strain, every rupee spent must pass the test of necessity rather than political expediency.
A city drowns every monsoon
The first heavy spell of rain has once again exposed Hyderabad’s crumbling civic infrastructure. Roads have turned into rivers, vehicles into boats and daily commuters into unwilling participants in an annual monsoon lottery.
Every year, governments promise solutions. And every year, the city drowns in the same neglect. This is not merely an engineering failure, it is a failure of priorities.
Welfare versus populism
No compassionate society can oppose helping the poor. Welfare is a legitimate responsibility of the state. But there is a clear distinction between welfare that empowers people and populism designed to influence elections.
Marriage assistance under different names, free bus travel to women and similar schemes may fetch votes, but they neither create wealth nor generate employment. They are recurring expenditures without corresponding economic returns.
The welfare schemes that deserve universal support are those that invest in people – quality education, affordable healthcare, and skill development. Good schools produce employable citizens. Good hospitals prevent families from slipping into poverty. These are investments, not expenses.
Governance begins with infrastructure
Hyderabad’s immediate priority is not another welfare announcement. It is an underground drainage system capable of handling heavy rainfall. It is better roads, scientific urban planning, reliable public transport and flood mitigation.
Telangana also needs industries, investments, and employment opportunities. Prosperity cannot be distributed before it is created.
The wrong message
Nothing illustrates misplaced priorities better than reports of spending crores on a helicopter for the chief minister’s travel while citizens continue to negotiate potholes, flooded roads and collapsing infrastructure.
If the roads are too poor even for the chief minister’s convoy, the obvious solution is not to fly over them but to fix them. A helicopter may solve one man’s travel problem. It solves nothing for millions below.
Build a legacy, not a dependency
Governments are remembered less for the number of schemes they announce than for the institutions and infrastructure they leave behind. Roads that do not collapse. Cities that do not flood. Schools that produce skilled graduates. Hospitals that people can trust. Industries that generate employment. These are the achievements that endure long after election slogans fade.
Votes may be won through giveaways, but hearts are won by governments that build a state where citizens no longer need them.
