Supreme Court seeks Bihar response on re-appointment of Deepak Prakash as minister without election

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the re-appointment of Deepak Prakash as Bihar's Minister of Panchayati Raj, despite his continued status as an unelected non-legislator [Rakesh Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar]..A vacation bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana issued the notice before adjourning the matter, as Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the petitioner, was not available. Advocate Sudeep Chandra for the petitioner informed the court about the senior lawyer's unavailability..Prakash was initially appointed and sworn in as Minister of Panchayati Raj on November 20, 2025, under the Council of Ministers headed by Nitish Kumar, despite not being an elected member of either the Bihar Legislative Assembly (Vidhan Sabha) or the Bihar Legislative Council (Vidhan Parishad). As per Article 164(4) of the Constitution, the maximum period a minister can continue in the post under these circumstances is a consecutive period of 6 months. This period would ordinarily expire on May 19, 2026 in Prakash's case..The petition states that Prakash continuously functioned as minister, exercised executive and administrative authority, participated in cabinet governance, issued governmental directions and discharged statutory and constitutional functions for approximately 4 months and 26 days without securing election, nomination, or membership to either House of the State legislature..Following the resignation and dissolution of the Nitish Kumar cabinet, Samrat Choudhary was sworn in as the 24th Chief Minister of Bihar on April 15, 2026. Prakash consequently demitted ministerial office and ceased to be part of the Council of Ministers.A gap period of approximately 22 days followed, extending from April 15, 2026 to May 6, 2026, during which Prakash admittedly held no constitutional, ministerial, executive, statutory, or public office whatsoever..On May 7, 2026, upon expansion of the newly constituted Council of Ministers, Prakash was once again re-appointed and sworn in as Minister of Panchayati Raj, despite continuing to remain an unelected non-legislator and despite having already availed approximately 4 months and 26 days of the constitutionally permissible six-month period under Article 164(4). Upon such reappointment, only a residual balance period of approximately 1 month and 4 days remained before expiry of the original six-month constitutional limitation calculated from November 20, 2025..The petitioner contends that by artificially fragmenting, interrupting, suspending and attempting to carry forward the unexpired balance of the original constitutional grace period through resignation and subsequent re-appointment under a reconstituted government during the tenure of the very same Legislative Assembly, the respondent authorities engaged in a colourable exercise of constitutional power intended to indirectly achieve what was constitutionally impermissible directly.The petition argues that such interpretation would render the constitutional restriction under Article 164(4) illusory, otiose and incapable of meaningful enforcement.It relies on the Supreme Court's ruling in SR Chaudhuri v. State of Punjab, which held that the 6-month constitutional window under Article 164(4) constitutes a strictly limited, temporary, non-renewable and one-time constitutional privilege during the tenure of a single Legislative Assembly. The Court further held that repeated or successive continuation of unelected individuals in ministerial office through structural, political, or procedural devices would amount to a fraud upon the Constitution..The petition seeks a declaration that the reappointment dated May 7, 2026 is unconstitutional, void ab initio, illegal, contrary to Article 164(4) and violative of the binding law declared by the Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution..The PIL has been filed by Rakesh Kumar Singh through Advocate Sanya Kaushal.