New Delhi, July 31: The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the Bihar government over the continuation of Panchayati Raj Minister Deepak Prakash, who has remained in office despite not being an elected member of either House of the state legislature, and sought an explanation on the constitutional basis for retaining him beyond the six-month limit prescribed under Article 164(4) of the Constitution.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohan was hearing a petition challenging Prakash’s reappointment as Panchayati Raj Minister following a change in government.
During the hearing, the Bench raised questions over whether the six-month period available to a minister who is not a legislator can begin afresh after the formation of a new government or whether the Constitution permits only a one-time six-month opportunity to secure election to the legislature.
“How are you retaining a minister beyond six months when he is not elected?” CJI Surya Kant asked.
Calling it a purely legal issue, the Chief Justice further observed, “This is a purely legal question. The state government must explain on what constitutional grounds a minister has remained in office for more than six months without being elected.”
The petition contends that permitting repeated six-month tenures for an unelected minister undermines the principles of representative democracy, parliamentary democracy, collective responsibility and electoral accountability.
It seeks a declaration that Deepak Prakash’s reappointment is unconstitutional, illegal and void, besides a direction restraining him from exercising the powers of the Panchayati Raj Minister.
According to the petition, Deepak Prakash served as Panchayati Raj Minister in the cabinet headed by Nitish Kumar for four months and 26 days before the government changed. After Samrat Chaudhary assumed office as Chief Minister on May 7, 2026, Prakash was reappointed to the same post despite not being elected to either House of the state legislature.
Appearing for the petitioner, counsel argued that the Constitution permits a non-legislator to remain a minister for only six months, after which the individual must either get elected or demit office.
“A person can remain a minister for six months even if he is not a member of either House. If he fails to become a member within six months, he must resign,” the petitioner’s counsel submitted, adding that “the matter requires immediate intervention.”
The Supreme Court has directed the Bihar government to file its response and posted the matter for further hearing on August 4, when it is expected to examine the constitutional interpretation of Article 164(4) and the validity of the minister’s continuation in office.
