Government employee's activity in private WhatsApp group cannot attract disciplinary action: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently held that the government cannot take action against an employee under the disciplinary rules of service for his activities in a private WhatsApp group [ID Makrani vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh]..Justice Vivek Rusia reasoned that forwarding a WhatsApp message in a WhatsApp group does not amount to making it public as such groups are private in nature and often formed by like-minded people.The Court made the observations while dealing with a petition filed by a government official who was suspended in February last year by the Commissioner of Indore Division for forwarding an "objectionable political message" in a WhatsApp group with other employees..Concluding that it was a private WhatsApp group that had nothing to do with the officer's work of the government, the Court said,“The Government has not issued any circular or made statutory provision for Government employee / office to create Whatsapp group, therefore, any activity of Government employee in the group cannot be linked with serious disciplinary rules.”.The petition was filed by ID Makrani who was earlier served a show cause notice by the Chief Executive Officer of Zila Panchayat in Alirajpur after he forwarded the WhatsApp message to the group. In response to the show cause notice, Makrani said that the message had inadvertently been forwarded by his six-year-old daughter.However, since the response was not found satisfactory, the Commissioner suspended Makrani and later a charge sheet was also issued to him under the Rule 3 of Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965..Challenging the action before the High Court, Makrani’s counsel contended that he had not made any derogatory remarks in public as the group was confined to only its members.It was also submitted that the forwarded message was not his personal opinion. However, the State contended that it was not expected from the employee to forward such a political message.The State counsel also said the petitioner’s claim that the message was inadvertently forwarded by his daughter was not correct as there was no reference about his daughter in the service book..The Court at the outset observed that the petitioner had not got his service book updated in respect of the birth of his daughter. It found other relevant documents to show that the petitioner has a daughter. “Therefore, petitioner has not taken a false plea that his daughter forwarded the message by mistake,” the Court concluded. .The Court also did not accept the contention that forwarding of a message on WhatsApp can be questioned under the Service rules.“Even otherwise, forwarding any message in a Whatsapp group does not comes in any of the provision of Rule 3(1)(i) and (iii) of Rules of 1965,” it said..The Court further opined that if a person forwards a message in a WhatsApp group, the same may not mean that he was expressing his personal opinion.“If any member forwards a message in the Whatsapp group which does not mean that it is his personal opinion. Any message in the form of text, photo or video sent in Whatsapp group is confined to the members of the said group. It cannot be said that message had been made public,” the Court observed..Explaining that a WhatsApp group is always formed by friends or like-minded people, the Court pointed out that a third person outside such a circle cannot be added without prior permission.The judge further remarked that a person who is not willing to continue being part of the group has the option to exit and delete the group from his account..Thus, the Court allowed the petition and quashed the order of suspension as well as the charge sheet issued to the petitioner.Advocate Abhishek Sharda represented the petitioner.Panel Lawyer Sudhanshu Vyas represented the State..[Read Judgment]