Supreme Court Disposes Of 2009 PIL Against Mayawati Statues, Asks All Parties To Follow ECI Directions On Use Of Public Funds

The Supreme Court on January 15 disposed of a 2009 Public Interest Litigation which was filed against the construction of statues of Former UP Chief Minister Mayawati, her mentor Kanshi Ram and elephants - her party Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)'s symbol - at parks in Lucknow and Noida with taxpayers' money when she was chief minister between 2007 and 2012.A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma disposed of the petition in light of the subsequent developments including the instructions by the Election Commission of India (ECI) against the use of public money to propagate party symbols.In the order uploaded yesterday, the Court directed that all parties must follow the ECI directions."it is necessary to observe that the instructions issued by ECI on 07.10.2016 or its modified or substituted version referred to above shall be complied with not only by respondent No.2 but all political parties in the country," the Court observed.Arguments of petitioners and respondentsWhile terming the PIL as "politically motivated" and "gross abuse of process of law," the former CM had defended the decision to spend public money on the construction of statues stating that the building of statues represented the will of the people. The State had contended that the construction was in line with the will of the founder of the BSP, Kanshiram. It was argued that the funds for the construction of the said memorials and installation of statutes have been sanctioned through budgetary allocation after the due approval of the State legislature and the passing of the relevant Appropriation Act by the legislature in accordance with law.In an affidavit filed by the BSP leader, she had stated before the Court her life was dedicated to espousing the cause of Dalits and that she decided to remain unmarried to pursue the goal of upliftment of the downtrodden."The will of the people was expressed by the State Legislature with a proposal to install the statues of the answering respondent at the memorials to show their respect to contemporary women Dalit leader who has decided to sacrifice her life for the cause of underprivileged communities", she said in the affidavit.She had added that the memorials and statues of herself and other leaders were "intended to promote values and ideals of various sants, gurus, social reformers and leaders among the public and not intended to promote the symbol of BSP or to glorify".On the construction of statutes of elephants, the State argued elephants are a part of the Indian architectural designs and are found in a number of monuments and heritage structures. Therefore, it was claimed that their correlation to the election symbol of BSP is totally misconceived. Reliance was put on Article 282 of the Constitution to argue that legislative powers to incur expenditure are not limited only in respect of powers conferred under the Seventh Schedule.On the contrary, the petitioner argued that it was "an arbitrary move to glorify the Chief Minister". It was claimed that these acts of the State Government amounted to grabbing of public land and public parks.The petitioner had submitted that in constructing parks and memorials, the election symbol of the BSP, i.e., the elephant was widely used. It was argued big pillars having the motif of elephants put up across the parks and memorials were constructed. Also, a set of 90 elephant statues was made at the cost of Rs. 52.2 crores from the public exchequer. It was contended that public display of these statues and their permanent positioning in parks is a clear violation of the principles of free and fair election as it has an impact during the election.Further, was also argued by the petitioner the Chief Minister was even constructing huge stupas, domes and memorials for herself, including a part and a memorial beside the Yamuna river in the NCT of Delhi. The petitioner had contended that this amounted to a huge misuse of public money.The petitioner had alleged that this especially amounted to misuse at the hands of the State authorities as they acted contrary to their constitutional duty to protect the public funds and hold the resources of the community in public trust. It was argued construction of parts and statutes for an incumbent Chief Minister is "against the basic structure of the Constitution as it violates the right to equality and creates a special class of citizens."What did the Supreme Court say?The Supreme Court did not pass any observation in respect of the allegations and contended put forth by the petitioner and refuted by the State and the then CM.It took note of the ECI's instructions dated October 7, 2016, that no political parties shall henceforth either use or allow the use of any public funds or public place or government machinery for carrying out any activity that would amount to an advertisement for the party or propagating the election symbol allotted to the party. These instructions were passed in consonance with the Delhi...

Supreme Court Disposes Of 2009 PIL Against Mayawati Statues, Asks All Parties To Follow ECI Directions On Use Of Public Funds

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags