Madras High Court Bars Tamil Nadu from Naming Schemes After MK Stalin

The Madras High Court recently issued a directive to the Tamil Nadu government instructing it not to use Chief Minister MK Stalin’s name or image in any publicity material related to government welfare schemes. This decision came during the hearing of a petition filed by AIADMK MP CV Shanmugam, who objected to the use of Stalin’s name and former Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi’s image in various state-sponsored schemes and advertisements. The petitioner argued that such practices violated guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court as well as the Government Advertisement (Content Regulation) Guidelines, 2014.

Shanmugam’s petition specifically challenged schemes named ‘Ungaludan Stalin’ (translated as ‘Stalin with You’) and ‘Nalam Kaakum Stalin Thittam’, which bear the Chief Minister's name. He argued that branding these publicly funded initiatives with the name or image of a current political leader amounted to the misuse of public funds for political mileage. According to the petition, this naming strategy not only contravenes established legal precedents but also undermines the principle of neutrality in public administration. The petition cited earlier rulings of the Supreme Court that stressed the need for non-partisan promotion of government welfare programs.

Responding on behalf of the Tamil Nadu government, senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP P. Wilson defended the administration’s actions, calling the petition politically motivated and lacking a solid legal foundation. Wilson criticized the selective targeting of the ruling party’s branding choices and pointed out that other states and central schemes have used names like ‘NaMo’ (in reference to Prime Minister Narendra Modi) and ‘Amma’ (used for former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa) without judicial objection. He questioned why only ‘Ungaludan Stalin’ was being challenged and framed the petition as an attempt to malign the current government’s image.

Despite Wilson’s arguments, the Madras High Court maintained that its order did not oppose the schemes themselves, but rather focused on their nomenclature and presentation. The court clearly stated that while the schemes may continue to be implemented, their association with any living political personality—either through names or images—must cease. It emphasized that public welfare schemes, being funded by taxpayer money, should not serve as tools for political promotion or personality cults. Instead, they should reflect impartiality and serve the broader interests of the public.

The judgment reflects the judiciary’s consistent stance on maintaining a clear boundary between governance and political promotion. It reiterates earlier Supreme Court positions that prohibit using public funds to glorify individual leaders or political parties. By reinforcing these principles, the Madras High Court aims to preserve the sanctity and neutrality of public institutions and ensure that governance remains focused on service delivery rather than image-building.

In summary, the court’s ruling aims to prevent political personalization of government schemes. It reinforces judicial norms around neutrality, fairness, and the ethical use of public resources, ensuring that welfare initiatives remain focused on beneficiaries and not leveraged for political gain.