LDF misused public funds to 'glorify' itself: Plea in HC challenging state govt ads

The Kerala High Court on Thursday sought a response from the state government on the 'maintainability' of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging advertisements issued by the LDF government, alleging misuse of public funds for political messaging.

The plea alleges that the LDF government used public funds to "glorify" itself while portraying the earlier UDF regime in a negative light. The petition, filed by the Ernakulam District Congress Committee (DCC) president Muhammed Shiyas, seeks judicial scrutiny of a two-page jacket advertisement issued by the Kerala Information and Public Relations Department in several newspapers on March 5.

According to the plea, the advertisement violates constitutional principles that require political neutrality in the use of state resources. The petitioner argued that the timing, content and presentation of the advertisement amount to a "colourable exercise of power" intended to influence public perception ahead of elections in the state.

The petition further contends that the advertisement juxtaposes headlines portraying alleged failures of previous governments with reports highlighting the achievements of the present administration. This, the petitioner claims, creates a political narrative favourable to the ruling government while being funded from the public exchequer.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V M directed the respondents to file counter-affidavits within 10 days. "The question of maintainability of this petition as a public interest litigation is kept open," the court observed.

The Bench also declined to grant interim relief, stating: "We are not convinced prima facie."

The Supreme Court of India had earlier laid down guidelines regulating government advertisements to prevent their use for political propaganda. The petitioner also referred to a Kerala government order issued to implement these guidelines within the state.

The plea contends that the impugned advertisement violates these norms by promoting the political achievements of the present government while portraying previous administrations negatively.

(With LiveLaw inputs)