Employment opportunities

February 22, 2026

Abhishek Vij

The comments made by the country’s top court over the past two days while hearing two petitions are significant. On Wednesday, responding to a petition filed from Haryana, the Supreme Court remarked that nepotism and nepotism are obstacles for the younger generation. The court stated, “We strongly condemn nepotism. This evil prevents qualified people from finding work, while unqualified brothers and nephews occupy positions.”

How can the country develop like this? The Supreme Court’s comments on Thursday’s petitions on the “rewadi culture” were even harsher. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul Pancholi, remarked that while protection for the poor is fine, it would be wrong if the rich and the poor are given equal protection. This comment was made on a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Power Corporation, which argued that providing free electricity to everyone without considering the financial situation of consumers is not conducive to the country’s development.

While providing free or discounted services to those in need is fine, it would be unfair to grant these concessions to everyone without removing them for the wealthy. It’s okay to provide assistance to those who can’t afford to pay, but continuing these benefits for the wealthy, the affluent—what we call the creamy layer—may be politically expedient but is a financial waste. It’s completely wrong to provide the same concessions to everyone, rich and poor, and then never remove them. The court clearly stated that if states continue to provide free food, free bicycles, and electricity from dawn to dusk to maintain their positions, people’s willingness to work will diminish. Whenever elections are announced, political parties’ manifestos are filled with such concessions. Money is deposited into accounts without any work being done.

How is this wisdom? Many states are already in deep deficit and burdened with debt, yet they continue to launch new free schemes.
The Supreme Court was absolutely right in saying that this concession culture should be abandoned and instead of distributing free things, focus on creating employment. On one hand, the state is burdened with debt and interest, and on the other hand, how wise is it to try to appease the people with a concession culture? If food and water are provided without any effort, the feeling of idleness will become paramount. This must be eradicated.

Recently, a survey has been released on the interest in work among Asian people, which shows that people in Japan and China are very hardworking, while people in India are becoming lazy and leisure-loving. Indians, instead of looking for a new action plan or development plan, wait for a favor in every election agenda.

States may lack funds, but they do not hesitate to distribute favors, promoting freebies. Neither are workable plans announced, nor is any attention paid to their completion; instead, a culture of shortcuts and corruption has taken its place. As soon as election dates approach, political parties, instead of serving the public, begin offering favors in advance to garner votes. The Honorable Court stated that this is a self-destructive approach. We believe the Supreme Court’s observations are absolutely accurate. It would be far better if a culture of hard work emerged in the country instead of a culture of freebies.