The Madras High Court has issued a sharp interim order banning the use of political party names, symbols, or photos of former Chief Ministers and ideological leaders in advertisements for government welfare schemes. The directive aims to curb the politicisation of taxpayer-funded public welfare programmes and follows a petition filed by AIADMK MP C. Ve Shanmugam against the ruling DMK’s alleged misuse of state schemes for political mileage.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan underscored that such practices go against established Supreme Court directions and erode the neutrality of governance.
Backdrop: Petition Targets Use of CM’s Name and Photos
The petition specifically targeted the use of CM M.K. Stalin’s name in the DMK government’s “Muthalvarin Mugavari” grievance redressal scheme. Senior Advocate Vijay Narayan, representing Shanmugam, argued that the scheme’s nomenclature and publicity materials bore political undertones, including the party logo and images of DMK leaders. He said this contravened both Supreme Court rulings and the newly issued Government Advertisement (Content Regulation) Guidelines, 2024.
He added that such branding misleads the public into associating welfare delivery with a particular political party instead of the state.
Court Cites Supreme Court, Clarifies Scope
The court cited earlier Supreme Court rulings, including State of Karnataka v. Common Cause, which allowed photographs of incumbent Chief Ministers but barred photos of former CMs and ideological leaders. The Madras High Court reaffirmed that allowing such usage would be a violation of constitutional principles and judicial precedent.
However, it clarified that its interim order does not stall the launch or operation of the scheme itself. It only ensures that any branding or advertisement refrains from featuring party-specific elements.
DMK Responds, Accuses Politically Motivated Plea
In response, DMK’s legal counsel—including Advocate General PS Raman and Senior Advocate P Wilson—argued that the petition was politically motivated. Raman said the claims were based on unofficial materials and that government publications did not include such political branding.
Wilson asserted that the petitioner, an MP from the opposition, was misusing the court to tarnish the DMK’s image.
Implications for Political Advertising Nationwide
The order could set a precedent for similar challenges across India. It underscores the judiciary’s concern over the misuse of public funds for political self-promotion. With general elections approaching, the ruling is expected to prompt other courts and the Election Commission of India (ECI) to reinforce neutrality in state-sponsored programmes. The Madras High Court has not yet issued a final ruling but has made it clear that the line between governance and propaganda must not be blurred.