PIL Seeks Direction To CM Adityanath To Disclose Actual Name, Stop Using 'Yogi' As Title: Allahabad HC Dismisses It With ₹1 Lakh Cost

The Allahabad High Court on Monday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed seeking direction to Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath to disclose his full and actual name in the public domain, with Rs. 1 Lakh Cost.

The PIL plea moved by one Namaha also sought a direction to CM Yogi Adityanath to take the oath of office and secrecy under his real name and to refrain from using the word 'Yogi' as a title in his official communication.

Dismissing the PIL plea, the bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Piyush Agrawal noted that the petitioner, despite being a political person, deliberately chose to conceal his identity while filing the petition, apparently with some ulterior motive or cheap publicity.

The Court further noted that though, he had given his address of Delhi in the petition, however, at the time of the hearing, he stated that he belongs to Uttar Pradesh in an effort to mislead the Court.

The Court also took into account another fact about the petitioner. Essentially, the Petitioner claimed that he had been certified to be an illiterate person by the Election Commission of India, however, the Court noted that he argued his case in English, he was carrying a copy of the Constitution of India and could read the same very well.

"Still, he claimed that he had been certified to be illiterate by the Election Commission of India, apparently on the basis of some wrong information furnished by him," the Court added.

In view of this, finding the petition to be totally misconceived, filed with ulterior motive by a political person, without disclosing his complete credentials and concealing material facts from the Court, the court dismissed the plea.

Significantly, to discourage the filing of such frivolous petitions, the Court added, the petitioner deserves to be burdened with a cost of ₹1,00,000/-. Therefore, the Court directed him to deposit the said amount within a period of six weeks with the Viklang Kendra, Bharadwaj Ashram in Prayagraj.

In his plea, the Petitioner had claimed that UP Cm had been using different names at different places on different occasions and that while taking the oath as UP CM, he had pronounced his name differently.

Against this backdrop, the petitioner had claimed that a direction was required to be issued to him for disclosing his correct name as More than 25 crore residents of the State of Uttar Pradesh wanted an answer.

On the other hand, the Additional Advocate General appearing for the State of UP submitted that a perusal of reliefs prayed for in the writ petition showed that the same sought direction against UP Cm, impleaded as a private person, hence, he had contended that a writ petition wouldn't be maintainable.

Case title - Namaha v. State of U.P. and others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 206

Click Here To Read/Download Order