Maharashtra's Political Divide Over Union Budget 2026-27: Growth Roadmap vs. Inflation Concerns
Political reactions to the Union Budget 2026-27 in Maharashtra have drawn a clear ideological line, with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) hailing it as a transformative blueprint for development, while the opposition Congress and other critics lambast it for offering little direct relief on pressing issues like inflation, unemployment, and agricultural distress.
Ruling Coalition Applauds Budget as Strategic Vision for Developed India
Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, speaking from Mumbai, described the Budget presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman as a strong step towards a developed India. He emphasized that it provides crucial direction, pace, and funding across multiple sectors for the coming years, setting a robust foundation for economic advancement.
Union Minister Nitin Gadkari echoed this sentiment, calling the Budget a decisive roadmap centered on farmers, youth, and micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs). He highlighted that it strengthens inclusive growth, innovation, and capital investment, with targeted infrastructure and healthcare investments poised to enhance productivity and quality of life, supporting the broader goal of Viksit Bharat (Developed India).
State Revenue Minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule termed the Budget a milestone in India's reform journey, balancing growth with stability. He pointed to its thrust on agriculture, industry, tourism, employment, women, students, and healthcare, coupled with large-scale infrastructure investments, as transformative for cities like Mumbai, Pune, and Nagpur.
BJP MLAs added further praise:
- Pravin Datke called it a strategic document aimed at fulfilling the vision of a developed India, citing capital expenditure pushes, logistics strengthening, technology sectors, women's self-help groups, healthcare measures, and tax reforms as markers of long-term planning.
- Mohan Mate noted that duty-free import of 15 essential medicines would offer relief to patients and families, while TDS reductions would directly benefit the middle class by improving disposable income.
- Krishna Khopde described it as a balanced, development-oriented, and pro-people Budget, with significant provisions for farmers, the middle class, and youth, emphasizing infrastructure development and employment generation.
Minister of State Pankaj Bhoyar highlighted the Budget's boost to research, innovation, and entrepreneurship, citing a Rs 20,000 crore allocation for research and development and the announcement of over 50,000 Atal Tinkering Labs to strengthen the innovation ecosystem.
Opposition Criticizes Budget for Ignoring Common Citizens' Woes
On the other side of the aisle, Congress leaders voiced strong disapproval. Congress MLC Abhijit Wanjarri argued that the Budget ignores daily issues of common citizens, offering no concrete relief on inflation, unemployment, farmers' income, and the financial stress on the middle class.
Congress Legislature Party leader Vijay Wadettiwar alleged that Maharashtra was left empty-handed despite being a major contributor to the national exchequer. He criticized the lack of clear provisions for Minimum Support Price (MSP), storage, or agricultural infrastructure, claiming farmers were ignored.
Former Congress MLA Yashomati Thakur also termed the Budget disappointing and insensitive to farmers, the middle class, and inflation concerns, echoing the sentiment that it fails to address immediate economic hardships.
Mixed Perspectives from Other Political Voices
Amidst the polarized views, People's Republican Party national working President Jaydeep Kawade offered a nuanced take, stating that the budget is not just a balance of numbers but a document that clearly reflects the development vision of the Modi government. This perspective acknowledges the strategic intent while not directly endorsing or opposing the specific measures.
The divergent reactions underscore the deep-seated political and economic debates in Maharashtra, with the ruling side framing the Budget as a forward-looking growth-and-welfare roadmap, and the opposition highlighting perceived gaps in addressing inflation, jobs, and farm distress. As implementation unfolds, these contrasting viewpoints are likely to shape public discourse and policy evaluations in the state.
