Gig Platforms Move Karnataka High Court Against State Welfare Law
The parent company of Zomato and Blinkit, along with Zepto and Swiggy, have filed petitions in the Karnataka High Court challenging the state's new gig workers' welfare legislation. The companies argue that the state law directly conflicts with the central Code on Social Security, 2020, creating operational inconsistencies and invoking the doctrine of repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution.
Key Legal Challenge: Doctrine of Repugnancy
According to the petitioners, the Karnataka Gig Workers' Welfare Act, passed in 2024, imposes additional compliance burdens that contradict the central law. They contend that under Article 254, if a state law is repugnant to a central law on a concurrent list subject, the central law should prevail. The companies seek a declaration that the state enactment is void to the extent of the inconsistency.
Impact on Gig Economy Operations
The law mandates welfare fund contributions, social security benefits, and grievance redressal mechanisms for gig workers. The platforms claim this disrupts their pan-India operational model and could lead to increased costs. A source familiar with the matter said, 'The state law creates confusion and dual compliance, which is unworkable for platforms operating across multiple states.'
Background of the Karnataka Gig Workers' Welfare Act
Karnataka became one of the first states to enact a dedicated law for gig workers, aiming to provide social security, insurance, and fair working conditions. The law applies to platforms like food delivery and e-commerce aggregators. The central Code on Social Security, 2020, also covers gig workers but leaves implementation details to states, leading to potential overlaps.
Next Steps in Court
The Karnataka High Court is expected to hear the matter in the coming weeks. The outcome could set a precedent for similar laws in other states like Rajasthan and Maharashtra, which are considering their own gig worker regulations. Legal experts note that the case hinges on whether the state law truly conflicts with the central code or merely supplements it.
Industry and Worker Reactions
Industry bodies have supported the challenge, warning that state-level fragmentation could harm the gig economy. However, worker unions argue that the law is necessary to protect vulnerable workers. 'Without state action, gig workers remain without any safety net,' said a representative of the Karnataka Gig Workers' Union.
