1 hour ago
1
The Supreme Court connected Monday (June 15, 2026) issued announcement connected a plea challenging the assignment of Deepak Prakash arsenic Bihar’s Panchayati Raj Minister for a 2nd clip without being elected to either House of the State legislature.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana sought responses from the Bihar government, the Election Commission (EC) and Mr. Prakash connected a petition filed by Bihar nonmigratory Rakesh Kumar Singh. The plea challenges Mr. Prakash’s reappointment arsenic good arsenic his continuance successful bureau nether Article 164(4) of the Constitution.
Article 164(4) permits a idiosyncratic who is not a subordinate of the State legislature to beryllium appointed a Minister for a maximum play of six consecutive months. If the idiosyncratic fails to unafraid predetermination to either House of the legislature wrong that period, helium ceases to clasp ministerial office. The apical tribunal has antecedently ruled that the six-month grace play cannot beryllium invoked to support reappointing a non-legislator to ministerial bureau without an electoral mandate.
Mr. Prakash, lad of Rashtriya Lok Morcha (RLM) person Upendra Kushwaha, was appointed Panchayati Raj Minister connected November 20, 2025, successful the past Nitish Kumar authorities contempt not being a subordinate of either the Bihar Legislative Assembly oregon the Bihar Legislative Council.
Following the constitution of a caller Council of Ministers aft Mr. Kumar stepped down and Samrat Choudhary assumed bureau arsenic Chief Minister, Mr. Prakash was again sworn successful arsenic Panchayati Raj Minister connected May 7, 2026, though helium was inactive not a subordinate of the State legislature.
The petition is apt to beryllium listed adjacent for proceeding connected July 15.
‘Colourable exercise’
The petition, filed done advocate-on-record Sanya Kaushal and drawn by advocator Sudeep Chandra, alleged a “deliberate circumvention and structural subversion” of the law strategy embodied successful Article 164. It argued that the six-month grace play disposable to a non-legislator curate cannot beryllium repeatedly invoked each clip determination is simply a alteration of government.
According to the plea, Mr. Prakash was required to unafraid predetermination to the legislature betwixt November 20, 2025, erstwhile helium was archetypal sworn successful arsenic a minister, and May 20, 2026.
“...the six-month objection nether Article 164(4) is non-renewable and non-revivable during the tenure of the aforesaid Legislative Assembly and cannot beryllium reset done resignation, Cabinet reshuffles, alteration of Chief Minister, dissolution of a ministry, oregon reappointment,” the plea stated.
Mr. Singh alleged that the reappointment amounted to a “colourable workout of law power” designed to execute indirectly what could not beryllium achieved straight nether the Constitution. According to the plea, Mr. Prakash had already utilised astir 4 months and 26 days of the six-month play contemplated nether Article 164(4) from the day of his archetypal appointment, leaving small implicit a period earlier the law deadline expired.
The petition has accordingly sought a writ of quo warranto calling upon Mr. Prakash to disclose the law authorization nether which helium continues to clasp office. It besides seeks a declaration that his reappointment is unconstitutional, void and contrary to Article 164(4) of the Constitution.
