W.P.(C) 142/2022
Petition to restrain the use of public funds for political campaigning through government advertisements

                   

State governments across the country have started to roll out extensive advertisement campaigns outside the territory of their respective states for projecting personalities and promoting particular parties without the interest of the target audience or prime beneficiaries of that government’s achievements, policies and welfare measures.

Common Cause filed the petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, seeking appropriate directions in the form of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/orders or directions to the Respondents to restrain them from using public funds on government advertisements in ways that are completely malafide and arbitrary and amount to breach of trust, abuse of office, violation of the directions/guidelines issued by this court and violation of fundamental rights of citizens under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 

The Supreme Court in its judgment dated 13-05-2015 in Common Cause vs. Union of India (2015) 7 SCC 1, had issued several guidelines aimed at regulating government advertisements in order to check the misuse of public funds by central and state governments. The five principles of those guidelines were as follows:

  1. Advertising campaigns are to be related to government responsibilities,
  2. Materials should be presented in an objective, fair and accessible manner and designed to meet objectives of the campaign,
  3. Not directed at promoting political interests of a Party,
  4. Campaigns must be justified and undertaken in an efficient and cost-effective manner and
  5. Advertisements must comply with legal requirements and financial regulations and procedures

The objectives behind rolling out these guidelines, as pointed out in the judgment dated 13-05-2015, were as follows:

  1. To prevent arbitrary use of public funds for advertising by public authorities to project particular personalities, parties or governments without any attendant public interest
  2. neither to belittle the need nor to deny the authority of the Union and State Governments and its agencies to disseminate information necessary for public to know on the policies and programmes of Government but only to exclude the possibility of any misuse of public funds on advertisement campaigns in order to gain political mileage by the political establishment;
  3. to address the gap in the existing DAVP Guidelines which only deal with the eligibility and empanelment of newspapers/journals or other media, their rates of payment, and such like matters and not on how to regulate the content of Government advertisements;
  4. to ensure that “all government activities satisfy the test of reasonableness and public interest, particularly while dealing with public funds and property”;
  5. to ensure that government messaging is well co-ordinate, effectively managed in the best democratic traditions and is responsive to the diverse information needs of the public.

It is submitted that six specific issues that are being brought to the notice of this Hon’ble Court by way of this petition are as follows:

  1. Publication of advertisements by state governments outside the territorial limits of their respective states
  2. Publication of government advertisements in the form of ‘advertorials’
  3. Publication of government advertisements during/prior to the elections
  4. Issues concerning the ‘Committee on Content Regulation of Government Advertisements’ (CCRGA)
  5. Publication of Photographs of functionaries on Government Advertisements
  6. Advertisements in the name of Awareness Campaigns

On September 26, 2022, Justice Chandrachud & Justice Kohli issued notice in the matter 

Presently, the matter is pending before the Registrar H. Shashidhara Shetty. As the service has been completed, the Registrar recorded the activities with respect to the filings of various respondents on August 10, 2023 and on July 7, 2023:

  1. The states of Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan and Sikkim have submitted the counter affidavit.
  2. Union of India and the states of Chhattisgarh, Goa, Karnataka, Nagaland, Uttarakhand and West Bengal were granted four weeks as final opportunity for filing the counter affidavit.
  3. The representatives of the states of Haryana and Meghalaya had requested more time for filing vakalatnama and counter affidavit and were given four weeks as final opportunity.
  4. Rest of the respondents (Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Kerala, Manipur, Mizoram, Odisha, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir) have not entered appearance

On September 21, 2023 the Court recorded the following:

  1. The states of Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan and Sikkim have filed the counter affidavit.
  2. The states of Chhattisgarh, Goa, Karnataka, Nagaland, Uttarakhand and West Bengal have failed to file counter affidavit despite last opportunity having been granted, as such, further opportunity stands declined.
  3. The Union of India has failed to file counter affidavit despite last opportunity having been granted. However, the Counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India submitted that that they have filed counter affidavit on September 21, 2023 morning. The Court directed the registry to verify and update the records for the same.
  4. Memo of appearance has been filed in respect of the State of Haryana. The Court noted that Vakalatnama and counter affidavit have not been filed despite last opportunity having been granted. The Court declined further opportunity to file counter affidavit however, it recorded that Vakalatnama may be filed as per Supreme Court Rules.
  5. Memo of appearance has been filed in respect of the State of Punjab. The Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Punjab submitted that they have filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the said respondent two days back and seeks time to file counter affidavit. The Court directed the Registry to verify and update the records. The Court further directed that Counter affidavit be filed within four weeks as final opportunity.
  6. Service is complete on the State of Gujarat. However, the Counsel appearing for the said respondent sought time for filing vakalatnama and counter affidavit. The Court directed that the same shall be filed within four weeks time.
  7. Service is complete on the States of Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir.  

Earlier, the registrar ordered matter to be listed again on 8 December, 2023 but was postponed to 30th January, 2024. 

 

Download :

W.P.(C) 142 of 2022
Order_26 Sept 2022
Order_07 Jul 2023
Order_10 Aug 2023
Order_21 Sep 2023
Order_06 Nov 2023