The Madras High Court issued an interim injunction restraining the Tamil Nadu Government from naming new or rebranded welfare schemes after any living political personality, or including photographs of former Chief Ministers, ideological leaders, or political party insignia/emblems/flags, in official advertisements pending the writ petition.
The writ petition was filed in public interest by C. Ve. Shanmugam, a sitting Member of Parliament, challenging the State’s practice of using the names and images of the incumbent Chief Minister and prominent party leaders in the nomenclature and promotional material for welfare schemes. The petitioner alleged that these practices violated Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Common Cause vs Union of India[1] and State of Karnataka vs Common Cause[2], the Government Advertisement (Content Regulation) Guidelines, 2014, as well as recent directives of the Election Commission of India.
The State and ruling party, opposing interim relief, asserted that no such illegal material had been published by the government and contended that the petitioner’s allegations relied on unauthenticated printouts. The State sought time to submit an affidavit with genuine documents, while the Election Commission and other respondents underlined the enforceability of Supreme Court and ECI guidelines on advertisement conduct.
The Bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan examined Supreme Court directives and noted that while the State is permitted, by way of an exception, to display the photograph of the incumbent Chief Minister in connection with government schemes (per State of Karnataka vs Common Cause[3]), the use of (i) names of any living political figure in the title/nomenclature of schemes, (ii) photographs of former Chief Ministers/ideological leaders, and (iii) political party insignia or logo in such official communication, is prima facie impermissible. The Court reasoned that such acts could be against the principles laid down by the Supreme Court and in violation of Election Commission and government guidelines.
Accordingly, the High Court directed the State not to include “the name of any living personality, photograph of any former Chief Minister/ideological leaders or party insignia/emblem/flag” in the launching or advertising of welfare schemes. The order made clear it was not stalling or restraining the schemes themselves, only the challenged content in their advertisement. The matter remains pending, and the Election Commission’s independent powers to act on any complaint were expressly preserved.
Appearances:
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Vijay Narayan, Senior Counsel for Mr. K. Gowthamkumar
For Respondent(s): Mr. Niranjan Rajagopalan for M/s G.R. Associates for R1
Mr.P.S. Raman, Advocate General Assisted by Mr. A. Edwin Prabakar State Government Pleader, Mr. K. Karthik Jagannath Government Advocate, and Mr. M. Habeen Rahman Government Advocate for R3
Mr. P. Wilson, Senior Counsel for Mr. Richardson Wilson for R4
[1] (2015) 7 SCC 1
[2] (2016) 13 SCC 639
[3] (2016) 13 SCC 639
