Karnataka High Court Dismisses Petition Seeking Ban On Photos Of CM And Other Ministers On Government Advertisements
The Karnataka High Court dismissed a Writ Petition seeking directions against the Respondent authorities to remove names and photographs of the Chief Minister (CM), Deputy Chief Minister (DCM), and concerned ministers (Ministers) from various advertisements and sanction orders of government in connection with the implementation of Gruhalakshmi and Gruha Jyothi Schemes.
The Bench headed by Chief Justice Prasanna B. Varale and comprising Justice Krishna S Dixit noted, “However, no specific direction in the form of magistra dicta is pointed out which constitutes an absolute embargo against the publication of photographs of Chief Minister or other Ministers, in a small margin of the advertisements. A cursory look at the advertisement copies produced as annexures to the Petition do not depict the photographs with the glare & pomp. However, we hasten to add that we are not inclined to approve this also”.
Advocate Umapathi S. appeared for the Petitioner, and Additional Government Advocate Niloufer Akbar appeared for the Respondent.
A Writ Petition was filed before the Court seeking directions against the Respondents for the removal of names and photographs of the Chief Minister (CM), Deputy Chief Minister (DCM), and concerned ministers (Ministers) of the departments from various advertisements and sanction orders of government in connection with the implementation of Gruhalakshmi and Gruha Jyothi Schemes.
The Court observed that per the Constitution, the country functions as a Democratic Republic with periodic elections for legislative bodies. Political parties and candidates present their policies and programs in their manifesto during elections. The Court noted that after assuming office, the government creates policies and programs that are communicated to the public for individual and collective benefit. Some countries, including Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, have policies regulating governmental advertisements to promote transparency and accountability.
However, the Court rejected the Petitioner’s contentions that using photographs of ministers in advertisements is unconstitutional and expensive. The Court held that there is no absolute ban on publishing photographs of CM or Ministers in a small margin of advertisements. Nevertheless, the Court emphasized that the judgments must be understood in context rather than as absolute rules.
The Court outlined the importance of State legislations that regulates advertisements within their jurisdictional limits. The Court held that the Petition is without merits.
“The above being said, we also ntoice are State lgislations such as Section 136 of Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964, Section 138 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 which provide for regulation of advertisements within their jurisdictional limits. There is also a special statute namely, the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981, which provides for removal of flexes & boards that prevent sight, disfigure or uglify the places open to public view, and such an act is criminalised too. It is not the case of petitioner that any of the advertisements undertaken by the Government are in the infringement of the provisions of these statutes”, the Court noted.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Petition.
Cause Title: Sri Bhimappa Gundappa Gadad v The State of Karnataka