Priyank Kharge, Minister for Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, at a press conference in Kalaburagi city on Saturday.

Priyank Kharge, Minister for Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, at a press conference in Kalaburagi city on Saturday.
| Photo Credit: ARUN KULKARNI

The State government has decided to legally challenge the Centre’s VB-G RAM G Act, describing it as unconstitutional, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Minister and district in-charge Priyank Kharge has said.

Addressing a press conference in Kalaburagi city on Saturday, Mr. Kharge said the State Cabinet had already passed a resolution opposing the legislation. He said a two-day special session of the legislature would be convened to discuss the law in detail. “We will present our arguments, and the Centre can present theirs,” he said, and added that the women’s organisations and labour unions were extending support to the State’s stand.

Mr. Kharge, drawing a parallel with the repealed farm laws, said the VB-G RAM G Act too would be withdrawn by the Centre following sustained opposition.

Responding to the BJP’s claim that the VB-G RAM G law was meant to curb irregularities in the MGNREGA Scheme, Mr. Kharge said the scheme had been providing employment to crores of workers and livelihood support to thousands of families for nearly two decades. If there are irregularities in a few places, does it justify dismantling an entire welfare programme, he questioned, pointing out that reports had flagged alleged irregularities worth ₹14,500 crore in the Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY), which had not been scrapped.

He questioned why the BJP-led government at Centre, which had been in power for 11 years, had failed to act earlier if corruption in the MGNREGA scheme was widespread.

Replying to a question regarding the Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025, awaiting the Governor’s approval, Mr. Kharge expressed his displeasure over the Governor keeping certain Bills passed by the legislature pending without granting assent, alleging that they were being withheld for political reasons.

Governors were free to offer suggestions or seek clarifications, but it was not appropriate to indefinitely delay legislation duly passed by the elected government, as it undermined the legislative process, he said.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *