The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the use of names and photographs of the Chief Minister, Deputy Chief Minister, and other ministers in the advertisements of two recently-launched schemes by the State government [Sri Bhimappa Gundappa Gadad v. The State of Karnataka].
A division bench consisting of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit stated that the argument claiming that the use of ministers' photographs would incur expenses for the public exchequer and therefore be unconstitutional seemed to be an exaggerated argument.
"We do not fully agree with the submission that these advertisements involve significant expenditures and should therefore never be allowed. In life, whether it be for individuals or institutions, nothing comes for free," the Court stated.
These observations were made by the Court in response to the PIL filed by Right to Information (RTI) activist Bhimappa Gundappa Gadad regarding the government's advertisements for the Gruha Lakshmi and Gruha Jyothi schemes.
Although the Court found no merit in the petition, it clarified that it does not endorse the publication of photographs in such advertisements.
The Court acknowledged the concerns expressed by the Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause vs. Union of India, which warned that the publication of photographs may lead to the development of a "personality cult" and the promotion of an individual's image, which goes against democratic functioning.
While noting that the top court did not issue a complete ban on such publication, the division bench stated,
"We would like to emphasize that we are also not inclined to approve of this practice. After all, judgments of the Law Laying Court cannot be interpreted as Euclid's Theorem. They must be understood in the context of the factual circumstances, from which the legal principle is derived."
The Court also stated that the advertisements presented before it lack photographs that exhibit ostentation and grandeur.
Furthermore, it acknowledged that the petitioner has not claimed that any of the advertisements violate the Karnataka Municipalities Act, Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, and the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981. These legislations contain specific provisions for the regulation of advertisements.
Upon dismissing the petition, the Court expressed its hope and trust that those in authority will exercise better judgment.
"We want to clarify that the aforementioned statements should not be interpreted as the Court endorsing the inclusion of photographs of any minister in government advertisements," the Court concluded.
The petitioner was represented by Advocate Umapathi S.
The State was represented by Additional Government Advocate Niloufer Akbar.
Click Here to: Download/View Related File
TAGS: KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT ADVERTISEMENT REGULATION PIL DISMISSED
