August 13, 2025 5:42 pm

Supreme Court Upholds Ungaludan Stalin Scheme Name

CURRENT AFFAIRS: Supreme Court of India, Ungaludan Stalin, Madras High Court, C. Ve. Shanmugam, Tamil Nadu government, Election Commission of India, Content Regulation Committee, welfare schemes, political leaders, outreach programme

Supreme Court Upholds Ungaludan Stalin Scheme Name

Supreme Court verdict

Supreme Court Upholds Ungaludan Stalin Scheme Name: On August 6, 2025, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a plea against the Tamil Nadu government’s outreach programme Ungaludan Stalin.
The court called the plea misconceived and an abuse of law, imposing a ₹10 lakh penalty on C. Ve. Shanmugam.
This penalty will be paid to the Tamil Nadu government for use in welfare schemes.

Static GK fact: The Supreme Court of India was established in 1950 under Article 124 of the Constitution.

Madras High Court order overturned

The apex court set aside a Madras High Court order that had restrained the Tamil Nadu government from naming schemes after living persons.
It observed that targeting only the ruling party and its Chief Minister indicated political motivation.

Static GK fact: The Madras High Court, founded in 1862, is one of the three chartered High Courts in India.

Common practice in India

The court noted that naming welfare schemes after political leaders is a long-standing practice across India.
The petitioner had not objected to schemes named after other living leaders from various political parties.

Static GK fact: Several states in India have schemes named after leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, and M. G. Ramachandran.

Election Commission and advertising concerns

The petition had also sought action from the Election Commission of India under Paragraph 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
It requested the Content Regulation Committee on Government Advertising to act against the use of the name Stalin.

Static GK fact: The Election Commission of India is a constitutional body under Article 324.

Scheme allowed to continue

The Supreme Court concluded that Ungaludan Stalin is citizen-focused and not intended for political propaganda.
The Tamil Nadu government is now free to continue using the name for its welfare programme.

Static GK fact: Tamil Nadu has a long tradition of welfare schemes, including the Midday Meal Scheme introduced in the 1980s.

Static Usthadian Current Affairs Table

Supreme Court Upholds Ungaludan Stalin Scheme Name:

Fact Detail
Date of Supreme Court verdict August 6, 2025
Programme name Ungaludan Stalin
Petitioner C. Ve. Shanmugam
Penalty imposed ₹10 lakh
Beneficiary of penalty Tamil Nadu government welfare schemes
High Court order overturned Madras High Court
Legal reference Paragraph 16A, Election Symbols Order 1968
Oversight body referred Content Regulation Committee on Government Advertising
Court observation Naming schemes after leaders is common practice
Outcome Scheme name allowed to continue
Supreme Court Upholds Ungaludan Stalin Scheme Name
  1. SC upheld Ungaludan Stalin scheme name on Aug 6, 2025.
  2. Dismissed petition by Ve. Shanmugam.
  3. Imposed ₹10 lakh penalty on petitioner.
  4. Penalty to fund TN govt welfare schemes.
  5. Overturned Madras High Court
  6. Targeting CM seen as politically motivated.
  7. Naming schemes after leaders common in India.
  8. No objection to other leaders’ names earlier.
  9. EC petition cited Paragraph 16A of Symbols Order 1968.
  10. Sought Content Regulation Committee
  11. SC found scheme citizen-focused.
  12. Not political propaganda.
  13. Tamil Nadu free to continue programme.
  14. SC established under Article 124 in 1950.
  15. Madras High Court founded in 1862.
  16. Other schemes named after Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, MGR.
  17. EC functions under Article 324.
  18. TN has strong welfare scheme tradition.
  19. Midday Meal Scheme introduced in 1980s.
  20. Verdict reinforces judicial independence.

Q1. On which date did the Supreme Court uphold the Ungaludan Stalin scheme name?


Q2. Who filed the plea against the Ungaludan Stalin scheme?


Q3. What penalty did the Supreme Court impose on the petitioner?


Q4. Which High Court’s order was overturned?


Q5. Under which order was the EC asked to act in the petition?


Your Score: 0

Current Affairs PDF August 13

Descriptive CA PDF

One-Liner CA PDF

MCQ CA PDF​

CA PDF Tamil

Descriptive CA PDF Tamil

One-Liner CA PDF Tamil

MCQ CA PDF Tamil

CA PDF Hindi

Descriptive CA PDF Hindi

One-Liner CA PDF Hindi

MCQ CA PDF Hindi

News of the Day

Premium

National Tribal Health Conclave 2025: Advancing Inclusive Healthcare for Tribal India
New Client Special Offer

20% Off

Aenean leo ligulaconsequat vitae, eleifend acer neque sed ipsum. Nam quam nunc, blandit vel, tempus.