Several platform aggregators have asked the Karnataka High Court to strike down the state’s gig workers welfare law, arguing that it clashes with the central social security framework. The writ petition, filed on June 27 by the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), along with Eternal Ltd (Zomato’s parent), Zepto, Swiggy, Urban Company, and Valmo Transportation, challenges the Karnataka Platform-Based Gig Workers (Social Security and Welfare) Act, 2025, and its rules, Bar and Bench reported. The court is yet to list the matter.
What are the platforms arguing? The petitioners invoke the doctrine of repugnancy under Article 254, which provides that a state law cannot stand if it conflicts with a central law on the same subject. They argue that Parliament’s Code on Social Security (CoSS), 2020, already establishes a national framework for gig and platform workers, covering their identification, welfare schemes, and aggregator contributions. Once Parliament occupies that field, they contend, Karnataka cannot operate a parallel regime.
What do the platforms say it costs them? The petition claims the state Act layers substantially similar welfare structures on top of the central Code, forcing aggregators to pay welfare contributions twice under two separate regimes. Beyond repugnancy, the companies argue that the Act and its rules are arbitrary, violate Article 14 (the right to equality), and infringe other fundamental rights.
The companies were part of the consultation. The Karnataka Labour Department published the draft Bill in June 2024 and invited objections. IAMAI, which now leads the petition, submitted comments, as did the National Association of Software and Service Companies (NASSCOM).
IAMAI’s objection at the time centred on the welfare fee, warning that it could distort prices and reduce demand for gig work in smaller cities. Its repugnancy argument has gained fresh significance because the central Labour Codes, including the Code on Social Security, came into effect only on November 21, 2025, after the Karnataka law was passed.
This leaves a question for the court: are the platforms relitigating a welfare fee they could not block during the consultation process?
Does the Act already answer this? The Karnataka Act states that the state welfare fee will count towards the “total contribution payable” under Section 114(4) of the CoSS, subject to reconciliation, and that it operates in addition to, and not in derogation of, other laws. The provision was drafted to align the state welfare fee with the central Code. Whether that is sufficient to defeat the repugnancy claim is now for the High Court to decide.
What does the law require? The Karnataka Act places several obligations on aggregators:
- A welfare fee of 1% to 5% on each payout made to a gig worker, funding a state Welfare Board and social security fund.
- Registration of all gig workers engaged on the platform.
- Internal Dispute…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
