Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (May 27) rejected a petition which sought to include the name of VD Savarkar in the schedule of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use )Act, 1956.

The petitioner, Pankaj Phadnis, who appeared in person, also contended that the Leader of Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, was violating fundamental duties by making comments against Savarkar.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih dismissed the writ petition, saying that no fundamental right of the petitioner is shown to have been violated.

As soon as the matter was taken, the petitioner said that he had been researching on Savarkar for years and wanted to "establish certain facts about Mr.Savarkar in a legally verifiable manner."

"What is the violation of your fundamental right?" CJI Gavai asked him. The petitioner replied that the Leader of Opposition cannot violate fundamental duties.

"Article 51A, fundamental duties. Leader of opposition cannot...Leader of Opposition cannot impede my fundamental duties." CJI replied that an Article 32 petition can be entertained only for the violation of fundamental rights.

The bench said that if the petitioner wanted to include something about Savarkar in the curriculum, then he needed to make a representation to the Union of India. Petitioner replied that he has already given such a representation.

Ultimately, the bench dismissed the petition, observing that the reliefs sought cannot be granted in a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.

A name included in the schedule of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use )Act, 1956, cannot be used in a manner contrary to the conditions prescribed by the Central Government.

Recently, a bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta had taken exception to the comments made by Rahul Gandhi against Savarkar.

Case : PANKAJ KUMUDCHANDRA PHADNIS vs LEADER OF OPPOSITION IN THE LOK SABHA & Ors. W.P.(C) No. 552/2025