In a significant legal move, several leading platform aggregators, including Swiggy and Zepto, alongside the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), have filed a writ petition in the Karnataka High Court. The petition challenges the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Platform Based Gig Workers (Social Security and Welfare) Act, 2025, along with its associated rules.
The petitioners, comprising IAMAI, Eternal Ltd, Zepto, Swiggy, Urban Company, and Valmo Transportation, are seeking the annulment of multiple notifications issued by the Chief Executive Officer under the Act. These notifications mandate platform companies to fulfill various statutory obligations, such as forming Internal Dispute Resolution Committees (IDRCs), paying welfare fees, and providing specific information.
This legal challenge has not yet been scheduled for a hearing before the Karnataka High Court. According to the petitioners, the Indian Parliament already addressed the issue of social security for gig and platform workers through the Code on Social Security, 2020 (COSS). This code was designed to unify labor welfare legislation, offering a comprehensive national framework that includes gig workers.
Despite this central framework, the Karnataka government enacted its own legislation, the Karnataka Platform Based Gig Workers (Social Security and Welfare) Act, 2025. This state-level act introduces similar welfare structures and additional financial obligations for aggregators, leading to regulatory overlap and potential operational conflicts. The petitioners argue that this state legislation directly conflicts with the central code, invoking the doctrine of repugnancy under Article 254 of the Indian Constitution.
The petition challenges not only the principal act but also the Karnataka Platform Based Gig Workers (Social Security and Welfare) Rules, 2025, the notification establishing the Karnataka Platform Based Gig Workers Welfare Board, and a government order dated February 12, 2026. Additionally, they contest notices issued on May 21, 2026, which directed platform companies to form IDRCs under Section 22 of the Act and Rule 26 of the Rules.
More Read
Further challenges extend to show-cause notices alleging non-compliance with the Act, including failures to form IDRCs, respond to communications, and use prescribed software for welfare fee payments. Notices demanding welfare fee payments by June 22, 2026, and proof of payment by July 5, 2026, are also being contested.
Besides asserting repugnancy with federal legislation, the petitioners argue that the state act and rules are arbitrary and infringe upon Article 14 of the Constitution, violating fundamental rights under Part III. They seek a judicial declaration that the state act, its rules, the Welfare Board notification, and the February 12, 2026, government order are unconstitutional. Additionally, they request the quashing of all related notices, including those regarding IDRCs, show-cause notices, and welfare fee demands.
The petitioners are represented by a legal team comprising Advocates P Chinnappa, Arvind Krishna, and CMS IndusLaw.
