Local body members’ oath violation: Kerala HC directs SEC to act on complaints within four weeks

Kochi: The Kerala High Court has instructed the State Election Commission (SEC) to examine and rule on complaints alleging deviations from the legally prescribed oath format taken by elected representatives of Local Self Government Institutions (LSGIs) within four weeks.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar VM issued the directive while disposing of a Public Interest Litigation that claimed several members elected to Panchayats, Municipalities and Corporations failed to adhere to mandatory statutory requirements during oath-taking after the 2025 local body polls.

The petitioner argued that the integrity of the oath ceremony was diluted due to deviations from the approved format, including the alleged inclusion of religious or political references. Such departures, he contended, were contrary to the constitutional and statutory framework governing local bodies.

It was also submitted that one of the complaints pertained to as many as 98 councillors.

In its counter affidavit, the SEC acknowledged receiving multiple complaints regarding variations from the prescribed oath form. It stated that six complaints — four from private individuals and two from Returning Officers — had been received, concerning around 26 elected representatives.

The Local Self Government Department (LSGD), in its affidavit, admitted that there had been instances of non-compliance with statutory norms relating to oath-taking. It relied on the Kerala High Court’s earlier ruling in Haridasan Palayil v. The Speaker of the 11th Kerala Legislative Assembly (AIR 2003 Kerala 328), which held that a member who does not take the oath in accordance with constitutional provisions cannot participate in proceedings or vote and may face penalties.

The LSGD stressed that oath-taking by elected members of LSGIs must strictly conform to Section 152 and Schedule II of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994; Section 143 and Schedule III of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994; and Rule 3 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Oath of Members, President and Vice President) Rules, 1995.

It maintained that the format prescribed under law is mandatory and does not permit alterations, additions, substitutions or embellishments.

The SEC further submitted that framing any code of conduct for oath-taking ceremonies in areas not specifically covered by statute would fall within the legislative domain.

The Court declined to examine the merits of the allegations at this stage, observing that the SEC is the competent authority to decide on the complaints.

Accordingly, the Bench directed the SEC to consider and dispose of the complaints in accordance with the law after giving all affected parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The Commission has been asked to complete the process within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order and to issue a reasoned decision, communicating it within one week thereafter.

Meanwhile, a separate petition challenging the oath taken by councillors of the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation — allegedly invoking various deities, martyrs and political movements — is pending before a Single Bench of the High Court.