2016 Supreme(SC) 1176
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RANJAN GOGOI, PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, JJ.
Centre for Public Interest Litigation - Petitioner
Versus
Kewal Kumar Sharma & Ors. - Respondents
Contempt Petition (C) No. 485 of 2015 In Writ Petition (C) No. 197 of 2004
With
Common Cause - Petitioner
Vs.
K. Gnanandesikan & Ors. - Respondents
Contempt Petition (C) No. 692 of 2015 In Writ Petition (C) No. 13 of 2003
Decided On : 28-04-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Mr. Govind Jee, Mr. O. Kulton, Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Ms. Meera Bhatia, Mr. Balraj Dewan
For the Respondents: Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, Mr. S.N. Terdal, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Mr. Subramonium Prasad, Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, Mr. Jayant Patel, Mr. Sidhartha Dave, Mr. Chirag M. Shroff
The judgment emphasized the responsibility of functionaries to ensure that Government advertisements carry the right message and do not glorify any particular individual.
Headnote:
Contempt Petition - Disobedience of Court Judgment - Paragraph 24 of the judgment dated 13th May, 2015 - The judgment of this Court dated 13th May, 2015 - Government Advertisements - Committee constituted - Advertisements by the State of Tamil Nadu - Government of NCT of Delhi - Purpose of Government advertisements
Fact of the Case:
The contempt petition was filed for willful disobedience of the judgment of the Court dated 13th May, 2015. The complaint included issues related to the constitution of the Three Member Committee, partisan nature of advertisements by the Delhi Government, and glorification of the personality of the Chief Minister of the State of Delhi and Tamil Nadu.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Three Member Committee had been constituted as directed in the judgment. It also addressed the partisan nature of advertisements and emphasized the purpose of Government advertisements as detailed in the judgment.
Issues: Constitution of the Three Member Committee, partisan nature of advertisements, glorification of the personality of the Chief Minister in advertisements
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the need for States to constitute their respective Committees as directed in the judgment and highlighted the responsibility of functionaries to ensure that Government advertisements carry the right message and do not glorify any particular individual.
Final Decision: The Court closed the contempt petition and directed the Chief Secretaries of all the States to be circulated a copy of the order.
ORDER :
CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 485/2015 IN WRIT PETITION C) NO. 197/2004
1. The present contempt petition has been filed for willful disobedience of the judgment of this Court dated 13th May, 2015 passed in Writ Petition No.13 of 2013 and other connected matters.
2. The complaint in the present contempt petition is three-fold. Firstly, it is contended that the Three Member Committee directed to be constituted in terms of paragraph 24 of the judgment of this Court dated 13th May, 2015 has not yet been constituted. Secondly, referring to two different sets of advertisements one in the electronic media and the another in the print media issued by the Delhi Government it is contended that the said advertisements are partisan in nature and has the effect of belittling the other political parties and also glorifying the personality of the Chief Minister of the State of Delhi. Thirdly, with regard to certain advertisements issued by the State of Tamil Nadu wherein apart from the publication of the photograph of the Chief Minister which was not permissible at that point of time, submissions have been made that the said advertisements have the effect of glorifying the personality of the Chief Minister of the State.
3. The response of the Union of India, the Government of NCT of Delhi and the State of Tamil Nadu have been filed. We have gone through the same. We have also heard the learned counsels for the parties.
4. Insofar as the constitution of the Three Member Committee is concerned,
the reply affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India indicates that on 6th April, 2016 such a Committee has been constituted consisting of the persons mentioned in the body of the affidavit. In fact, the first meeting of the Committee has been held on 18th April, 2016. The directions contained in paragraph 24 of the judgment dated 13th May, 2015, therefore, has been complied with. Shri Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that similar Committees should be constituted in respect of the States or the Committee constituted should be authorized by the States to also act on their behalf. In addition, it has been submitted by Shri Bhushan that this Court could consider arming the said Committee with certain additional powers to ensure effective enforcement of the duties cast on it by the judgment of this Court dated 13th May, 2015.
5. We have considered the aforesaid aspect of the matter and the arguments advanced, as stated above.
6. The spirit of the judgment of this Court dated 13th May, 2015 would require the States to also constitute their respective Committees which shall now be done. If the States so desire the Committee constituted at the Central level referred to in the affidavit of the Union of India may be entrusted with the task of overseeing the publication of advertisements in the States.
7. Insofar as the arming/empowering the Committee with any further powers is concerned we do not think it necessary to do so at this stage. In paragraph 24 of the judgment of this Court dated 13th May, 2015 it has been clearly laid down that the Committee constituted would be responsible for ironing out the creases that may show from time to time in the implementation of the directions of the Court and also to oversee such implementation. In the event it becomes so necessary and the Committee, for any reasons, is unable to render effective and meaningful service it is always open for an aggrieved party or a conscious citizen to approach this Court once again.
8. Specifically, insofar as the publication of advertisements by the State of Tamil Nadu is concerned we have perused the affidavit filed by the Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu which goes to show that the advertisements published by the State do not carry the photograph of the Chief Minister and the advertisements which do carry the photograph of the Chief Minister were so published by the Indian Express, New Delhi Edition and funded by the said Group and not by th