Allahabad HC Rejects PIL Seeking Clarification From UP Govt That It Isn't Working Under BJP's Command

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed seeking a direction to the state government to clarify that it not working under the commands of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The PIL Plea, filed by Advocate Manjesh Kumar Yadav, referred to a statement the Deputy Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Keshav Prasad Maurya, made last month during a one-day state working committee meeting of the BJP.

For context, Maurya had said that 'संगठन सरकार से बड़ा है' [party/organisation (referring to the Bharatiya Janata Party) is bigger than the Government). 

Referring to Maurya's statement, the PIL plea stated that it was completely contrary to the constitutional scheme of good governance, as no political party can dictate terms to the Council of Ministers.

The PIL Plea also added that state citizens have a fundamental right to be ruled by a democratic government with exclusive independence, excluding any kind of overriding influence from respondent Bhartiya Janta Party.

Against this backdrop, the PIL plea sought a direction to the state government to clarify that it is not working under the command of the BJP and that it is exercising its executive power exclusively independently without being influenced by the political interests of the BJP.

It was argued that though the people of the State, who do not have the concept of the Constitution of India, have not conceived the correct perspective of the said statement, the petitioner, being a lawyer, is duty bound to advocate and spouse the common cause for the benefit of the people of the State.

However, rejecting his plea, a bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar opined that the said statement was made at a party forum and that it, by itself, "cannot form the basis for coming to a conclusion regarding lack of good governance and expression of apprehension pertaining to lack of the same".

"The statements given by the Ministers, otherwise than in their official capacity, by itself, cannot form the basis for making allegations of the present nature and requiring the Council of Ministers to endorse or contradict the statement so made by the Minister," the Court remarked as it found no merits in the PIL plea and thus, the same was dismissed.

Case title - Manjesh Kumar Yadav vs. State of U.P. and 3 others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 497 [PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1454 of 2024]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 497

Click here To Read/Download Order