Supreme Court reserves order on ban on CM photos in govt ads

The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions filed by the Centre and several states, seeking a review of the judgment banning display of government advertisements with chief minister and others.

A bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C. pant also issued contempt of court notice to the states of Tamil Nadu and Delhi, seeking their response in six weeks on the allegation that they violated the apex court order dated May 13, 2015.

Through an order dated May 13, 2015, the same bench had held that only photographs of Prime Minister, President and Chief Justice of India can be published in official media advertisements and not those of CMs. This order was sought to be reviewed by the Centre and the states of Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Karnataka and Assam.

Making his submissions A-G Mukul Rohatgi said if the publication of the photograph of the PM was allowed, there was no reason why the photos of ministers in the Centre and the CMs in states should not be allowed. He said that display of only the PM’s photos in advertisements is not good for democracy.

If courts decide whether the advertisement is justified or not, it would really mean that the court is sitting in appeal over the decision of the executive, he said. It is akin to pre-censorship by the courts which cannot be done under the separation of powers in the Constitution, he added. The government is answerable to its people and the expenditure is audited by the CAG and approved by Parliament, he said and sought a review of the verdict.

The states pointed out that the expert panel had recommended display of photos of CMs / governors as well, but the apex court had restrained the states from displaying photos of CMs / governors. They said, “There is nothing wrong if a publication issued by the government highlighting its achievements contains photographs of the chief minister and other ministers, if they have made contributions to the achievements of the state government. The judgment is completely silent regarding the exclusion of the chief minister who is the head of the state government. If the photograph of the Prime Minister is permitted in the publication / advertisement then the photographs of the chief minister must also be permitted by this court.”

They said, “The government is the guardian of the finances of the state and the government takes its decisions as to how the finances are to be utilised. The court does not sit as a court of appeal but merely reviews the manner in which the decision was made. The court does not have the expertise to correct the administrative decision. If a review of the administrative decision is permitted, it will be substituting its own decision, without the necessary expertise which itself may be fallible.” Hence the petitions sought a review of the judgment banning display of CM in government advertisements.