The bench headed by Justice Ranjan Gogoi reserved its verdict on the review pleas of the Centre and seven states after hearing the day-long arguments in which it was submitted that besides Prime Minister, pictures of central ministers, Chief Ministers and others state ministers be allowed to be carried in public advertisements.
The bench also asked Delhi and Tamil Nadu to reply to its notice within six weeks.
The court had earlier barred publication of photos of leaders in government advertisements except those of the President, Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of India.
At the outset, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Centre, today strongly favoured review of the verdict on various grounds including that if Prime Minister's photograph is allowed in the advertisements then the same right should be available to his cabinet colleagues as the PM is the "first among the equals".
He further said that Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression) of the Constitution empowers the state and the citizens to "give and receive" information and it cannot be curtailed and regulated by the courts.
The fundamental right under Article 19 can only be regulated under Article 19 (2) which deals about reasonable restrictions to the freedom of speech and expression, he said.
The expenditure of governments is regulated either by
Parliament or by state legislatures and moreover, there is a body like Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India to take care of accounting aspect of expenditure incurred on advertisements, Rohatgi said.
Rohatgi also said that if only Prime Minister's photograph is allowed in government advertisements then it can be said that it would promote "personality cult" which has been described as "an anti-thesis of democracy" by this court only.
Other ministers and the Chief Ministers are also answerable to public and they cannot remain "faceless", he said adding that the apex court verdict has dealt with print advertisements only in the time where electronic and social media are also there.
During the hearing, advocate Meera Bhatia said despite the court's order, the Centre has not set up to the three-member panel to oversee implementation of the guidelines regulating government-funded advertisements.
The Centre had on October 27 last year joined hands with several state governments in seeking review of the Supreme Court's landmark judgement on the issue.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing NGO Common Cause, which had filed the original PIL, on review petitions filed by the states, had told the bench that certain state governments were violating the apex court's orders.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
