SUMMER INTERNSHIP PROGRAM 2020

Student’s Name- Aman Jain

Enrolment No- 17FLICDDN01018

Batch Name& Year- BBALLB HONS., 3rd year

Case Name- Common cause v Union of India

Submitted by Submitted to

Aman jain Sandeep & Kaushal sir

3rd year, BBALLB HONS. (Examiner)

TITLE OF THE CASE

Common Cause v Union of India

CITATION

(2015) 42 SCD 686

RELEVANT LAWS INVOLVED

Article 14,21 and Article 142 of Indian constitution.

BRIEF FACTS

Common cause and Centre for Public Interest litigation, filed a writ petition under article 32 of
the Indian Constitution against the use of public funds on government advertisements which
project a particular Individual as the sole reason of achievements of the government policy or a
political party. Also Supreme Court has been approached to provide appropriate guidelines to
regulate and restrain the misuse of public funds by utilizing the money in such government
advertisements. The petition was originally filed in 2003. The Supreme Court in April 2014
constituted a panel of three members with N.R. Menon as head and after full deliberations in the
matter suggested a set of guidelines in this matter. The Supreme court passed the judgment on
13th May,2015 along with certain guidelines.

ISSUES OF LAW

Whether the writ petition is maintainable?

Whether use of photos of political leaders leads to infringement of fundamental rights of citizen
under article 14 and 21 of the Constitution ?

Whether Supreme court can lay down binding Guidelines under article 142 of Indian constitution
in this matter?

ARGUMENT (PETITIONER)

Common cause and Centre for Public Interest litigation, contended that at many instances in garb
of communicating with people, undue political advantage is sought be various political leaders
projecting themselves responsible for various government achievements. Instead of conveying
necessary information to the citizens , the public funds are used for building personality cults for
some political leaders thus depriving citizens of their right of being aware of their rights and
entitlements. These activities become more rampant on election Eve. This results in gross
wastage of public money as well as misuse of governmental power and citizen’s fundamental
rights under article14 and 21 are breached.

ARGUMENT (RESPONDENT)

Union of India contended that the issues sought to be raised pertain to government policies and
executive decisions in respect of which it would not be appropriate for the supreme court to lay
down binding guidelines under article 142. The two cases were relied upon by the union in their
support, these being Manzoor Ali Khan and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors., and Umesh Mohan
Sethi Vs Union of India and Anr.

JUDGEMENT

Supreme Court gave a landmark judgment in this case by holding that taxpayers money cannot
be spent on such advertisements which rather than focusing on providing citizens with beneficial
information, aims at building personality cults of political leaders. The bench comprising of
Justice Ranjan Googoi and P. C. Ghose said that these advertisements should actually convey
necessary information to citizens for their welfare but use of photos of politicians and ministers
in these government ads results in Image making. However, as an exception photos of Prime
Minister, President and Chief justice of India can be used in such ads but only after approval
from these authorities. The court also said there is no need to for a curb on government ads on
election eve but these ads should be fairly provided to the media.

REASONING OF JUDGEMENT

The judgment came on the basis of series of recommendations given by committee which was
formed by Supreme Court in April 2014 with N.R. Madhava Menon as its head. Almost all the
recommendations of the committee has been adopted except for a few that has been modified ,
these modified recommendations are exception of use of photos of P.M., President and CJI,
appointment of an ombudsman, recommendation with regard to performance audit by each
ministry and embargo on advertisements on the eve of elections.