According to reports, the government diverted approximately ₹13,435 crore, representing 24.1% of the Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan and Tribal Sub-Plan funds, to implement the 'five guarantee' schemes. In the fiscal year 2024-25, this reallocation amounted to ₹14,283 crore. These schemes, central to the Congress party's electoral promises, aim to provide various social benefits across the state.
Chalavadi Narayanswamy, Leader of the Opposition in the Karnataka Legislative Council and a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party , condemned the fund diversion, stating, "By diverting funds for the guarantees, the government is snatching the rights of SC-ST communities." He emphasized that these funds are legally earmarked for the development of SC and ST communities and should not be repurposed for general welfare schemes.
The Dalit Sangarsh Samiti , an organization traditionally allied with the Congress, also expressed strong disapproval. Representatives from the DSS have voiced concerns that reallocating SCSP-TSP funds compromises initiatives specifically designed to uplift marginalized communities. They argue that such actions could hinder progress in education, healthcare, and employment opportunities for SC and ST populations.
In response to the growing dissent, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes has intervened, seeking a comprehensive report from the Karnataka government within seven days regarding the alleged fund diversion. This move underscores the gravity of the situation and the potential implications for the state's adherence to policies safeguarding the interests of SC and ST communities.
The controversy has also ignited protests across Karnataka. In Mangaluru, hundreds of Dalit activists organized demonstrations, accusing the state government of misappropriating SC/ST development funds. The protesters demanded the immediate restoration of these funds and called for the establishment of a vigilance committee to oversee their proper utilization. M. Devdas, State Organizing Coordinator of the DSS, criticized the government's actions, alleging that such fund diversions suppress the progress of Dalit communities.
The Karnataka Scheduled Castes Sub-Plan and Tribal Sub-Plan Act, 2013, mandates that specific percentages of the state's budget be allocated exclusively for the development of SC and ST communities. This legislation aims to prevent the diversion or misuse of funds intended for marginalized groups. However, activists have raised concerns about certain provisions within the Act that allow for funds to be used for general purposes, potentially diluting the impact of targeted development initiatives.
Government officials have defended the reallocation, asserting that a significant portion of the beneficiaries of the 'five guarantee' schemes are from SC and ST communities. They argue that these schemes are designed to provide broad-based social benefits, including to those from marginalized backgrounds, thereby justifying the use of SCSP-TSP funds.
Despite these assurances, opposition leaders remain unconvinced. They contend that the diversion of funds sets a concerning precedent and could lead to the marginalization of SC and ST communities in the long term. The BJP has announced plans to challenge the government's decision legally and has called for statewide protests to raise awareness about the issue.
The debate over the allocation of SCSP-TSP funds highlights the broader challenges governments face in balancing electoral promises with statutory obligations to marginalized communities. As the situation unfolds, the Karnataka government's actions will likely be scrutinized for their adherence to legal frameworks and their impact on the state's most vulnerable populations.
This controversy also raises questions about the efficacy of legislative safeguards designed to protect marginalized communities. While the Karnataka Scheduled Castes Sub-Plan and Tribal Sub-Plan Act was enacted to ensure dedicated funding for SC and ST development, the current dispute suggests potential loopholes that could be exploited, undermining the Act's original intent.