Back
B. V. NAGARATHNA, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Ravi Kant – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
The present petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. According to the two petitioners, they are advocates by profession and have filed the present writ petition in public interest challenging the policy adopted by the erstwhile Government of Uttar Pradesh, headed by the then Chief Minister of the State Ms. Mayawati, respondent No.2 to construct large number of statues of the Chief Minister; construction of parks for the glorification of the Chief Minister and installation of large statues of elephants, which is also the election symbol of the political party to which the said Chief Minister belongs. The petitioners have contended that crores of public money were spent by the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the construction of the aforementioned statues and parks using the funds from the state exchequer, only to benefit and glorify a particular individual and her party.
2. The petitioners contend that as per the State, it was an attempt to pay tribute to the great leaders of the Dalit community and was in line with the will of the founder of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), Sh. Kanshiram, but the said explanation advanced by the State is incorrect an
Public funds cannot be used for glorifying political leaders, ensuring compliance with electoral fairness principles.
The election commission’s authority under Article 324 allows for actions to ensure free and fair elections, including preventive measures against voter confusion, without necessarily violating princi....
The allotment of the Lotus symbol to a political party does not violate constitutional provisions and is not deemed a corrupt practice under the Representation of Peoples Act.
The Court ruled that naming welfare schemes after political figures is permissible, provided it does not misuse public funds for political glorification, emphasizing that proper judicial process must....
The Court upheld that the installation of a statue on private property constitutes a fundamental right under Articles 19(1)(a) and 21, and cannot be regulated by the State without lawful justificatio....
The court affirms the Supreme Court's prohibition on erecting statues in public spaces, emphasizing legal compliance and protection of citizens' rights.
The installation of statues by municipal authorities falls within their discretionary powers under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, and such actions are justified when they serve public saf....
The impugned clauses in the letters of registration were referable to the Second Amendment Order 1989 and within the Election Commission's power and jurisdiction.
Point of law: It is the political parties which sponsor candidates, that are in a position to incur large election expenses which often run into astronomical figures. We do not consider that preferri....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
