Kerala High Court Invalidates Oaths of 20 BJP Councillors, Orders Retake
The Kerala High Court has declared the oaths of 20 BJP councillors in Thiruvananthapuram invalid for failing to follow the prescribed legal format. The court has ordered them to retake the oath within four weeks to ensure strict compliance with the Municipality and Panchayat Acts.
Highlights
- •Kerala High Court invalidated the oaths of 20 BJP councillors for failing to follow the legal format.
- •Elected representatives are legally required to swear only in the name of God or by solemn affirmation.
- •The court has ordered all 20 councillors and one panchayat member to retake their oaths within four weeks.
- •The ruling followed a petition by a CPM councillor challenging the validity of the original oath-taking ceremony.
The Kerala High Court has issued a significant ruling regarding the legal obligations of elected representatives, declaring the oaths taken by 20 BJP councillors of the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation as invalid. The court’s decision mandates that these individuals must repeat the swearing-in process within four weeks to ensure compliance with established statutory requirements.
In his directive, Justice P V Kunhikrishnan emphasized that public officials must strictly adhere to the format prescribed by law when taking their official oaths. According to the Kerala Municipality Act and the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, representatives are strictly required to swear in the name of God or make a formal solemn affirmation. The court clarified that any deviation, including the addition of extra wording or modifications to the prescribed text, is legally impermissible.
Legal Clarification on Oath-Taking Procedures
The controversy arose following the 2025 local body elections. It was discovered that the BJP councillors had incorporated various additions into their oaths, citing names such as Mother India, regional deities, organizational martyrs, and Gurudevan. A separate case involving a panchayat member who took the oath in the name of the late Congress leader Oommen Chandy also highlighted the lack of adherence to the constitutional framework.
Drawing parallels to Article 188 of the Constitution of India and the requirements laid out in the Third Schedule, the court maintained that the law does not allow for elaborations or personal additions. While the specific definition of "God" remains broad in these statutes, the procedure for administration is rigid to ensure uniformity and legality in governance.
The petition leading to this verdict was initiated by CPM councillor S P Deepak, who challenged the validity of the ceremonies and requested the disqualification of the members. While the Kerala High Court stopped short of disturbing the election results themselves, it firmly mandated that the fresh oath-taking must occur to rectify the procedural error.
The list of those directed to undergo the process includes Deputy Mayor Ashanath G S and several others such as Chembazhanthi Uday, R Sugathan, and Vishnu Mohan. Notably, one of the affected councillors, R Sugathan, is currently held at Viyyur Central Jail under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, raising logistical questions regarding how the required formalities will be completed.
This situation comes as the BJP-led NDA maintains a significant presence in the 101-member Thiruvananthapuram Corporation, having secured 50 wards during the 2025 polls, while the LDF holds 29 seats and the UDF controls 19.
