Plea against Kushwaha’s son continuing as Bihar minister, SC issues notices

i The sublime margaret court on mon sought-after(a) responses from the Election direction of India (ECI) and Bihar panchayati raj minister Deepak Prakash on a petition questioning his continuance in office, through reappointment, despite not being an elected member of either House of the state legislature.A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justice V Mohana issued notice to the ECI, Prakash, the Bihar government on a plea filed by Bihar resident Rakesh Kumar Singh challenging the minister’s reappointment and continuance under Article 164(4) of the Constitution.The case is likely to be heard next on July 15.The petition, filed under Article 32 through advocate-on-record Sanya Kaushal and drawn by advocate Sudeep Chandra, seeks a writ of quo warranto questioning the authority under which Prakash continues to hold ministerial office. It challenges his reappointment on May 7, 2026, as being contrary to Article 164(4). Which permits a person who is not a member of the state legislature to be appointed a minister, but only for six consecutive months. If the person fails to get elected to either House of the legislature within that period, he ceases to be a minister. The Supreme Court has previously held that the provision cannot be used as a device to repeatedly appoint a non-legislator without securing an electoral mandate.Singh’s plea contends that the constitutional six-month window available to a non-legislator minister cannot be repeatedly invoked through resignation and reappointment to enable a person to continue in office without being elected.According to the petition, such a practice would amount to a circumvention of constitutional safeguards and undermine the principle of representative democracy.The petitioner seeks declarations that Prakash’s reappointment and continuance in office are unconstitutional, illegal and void, along with directions restraining him from exercising powers attached to the ministerial post.Singh has alleged a “deliberate circumvention and structural subversion” of the constitutional scheme embodied in Article 164 through what he describes as the artificial fragmentation and reutilisation of the limited grace period available to a non-legislator minister.Prakash was initially appointed and sworn in as Bihar’s Panchayati Raj Minister on November 20, 2025, under the council of ministers headed by Nitish Kumar, despite not being a member of either the Bihar legislative assembly or legislative council.The petition states that an intervening gap of about 22 days arose between April 15, 2026, and May 6, 2026, during which Prakash held no ministerial office after the formation of a new government headed by Samrat Choudhary. During that period, the Panchayati Raj portfolio remained with the chief minister, it says.However, following the expansion of the council of ministers on May 7, 2026, Prakash was reappointed as Panchayati Raj minister despite continuing to remain an unelected.According to the plea, Prakash had already utilised nearly four months and 26 days of the six-month period contemplated under Article 164(4) from the date of his original appointment, leaving only a little over a month before the constitutional deadline expired.The petitioner argues that by resigning and subsequently being reappointed under a reconstituted government during the tenure of the same legislative assembly, the constitutional limitation cannot be reset or extended. The plea alleges that the exercise amounts to a “colourable exercise of constitutional power” designed to achieve indirectly what cannot be achieved directly under the Constitution.The petition accordingly seeks a writ of quo warranto requiring Prakash to disclose the constitutional authority under which he continues to hold office and seeks a declaration that his reappointment is unconstitutional, void and contrary to Article 164(4).