Allahabad HC Rejects PIL Seeking Clarification on State Govt’s Independence from BJP

The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking a directive to the state government to clarify that it is not functioning under the influence of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

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

In his statement, Maurya asserted that ‘संगठन सरकार से बड़ा है’ [the party/organization (referring to the Bharatiya Janata Party) is bigger than the government].

The plea argued that Maurya’s statement was entirely contrary to the constitutional principles of good governance, as no political party should dictate terms to the Council of Ministers. The PIL further stated that the citizens of the state have a fundamental right to be governed by a democratic government that operates independently, free from any overriding influence by the BJP.

In light of this, the PIL sought a court directive requiring the state government to clarify that it is not operating under the BJP’s command and that it exercises its executive powers independently, without being influenced by the party’s political interests.

The petitioner, being a lawyer, emphasized his responsibility to advocate for the public good, particularly for the citizens of the state who might not fully grasp the constitutional implications of Maurya’s statement.

However, a bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar rejected the plea, noting that the statement was made at a party forum and, by itself, could not be used to infer a lack of good governance or raise concerns about it.

The Court remarked that statements made by ministers in a non-official capacity could not form the basis for allegations of this nature, nor could they necessitate a response from the Council of Ministers. Finding no merit in the PIL, the Court dismissed the petition.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International