JUDGMENT : 1. The prayer in this PIL is as follows: “This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order/direction to respondents to disclose the source, scope and nature of Man Ki Baat and also the categorization of the same under the Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990 and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder to petitioner/ every other illegally illiterate Indian citizen for the upholding and enhancing of the democratic values and ideals set by the Constitution of India and also to pass any other order as the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” [2] The grievance of the petitioner is at para (3), (4), (5) and (6) of the petition which reads as follows: “(3) That in the course of the functioning of the Indian Parliamentary/ cabinet system certain extra-constitutional bodies has come into existence of which the most important ones are (1) Cabinet Secretariat and (2) Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) (originally Prime Minister’s Secretariat). Cabinet Secretariat is headed by the Cabinet Secretary to Hon’ble Prime Minister. PMO is headed by the Principal Secretary to Hon’ble Prime Minister. However, both the Secretaries exercise their respective powers and functions under the control and supervision of Hon’ble Prime Minister. As such, the powers and functions of both Cabinet Secretariat and PMO are overlapping each other and the actual line of demarcation between the two is not drawn. And it is only and only through these two extra-constitutional bodies. Hon’ble Prime Minister exercises his power and functions in relation to the administration of the Republic of India. However, his exercise of these powers and functions cannot override the principle of collective responsibility to the House of the People mandated by Article 75(3) of the Constitution of India which lays down thus: “The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the House of the people”. Hon’ble Prime Minister has a constitutionally bound-duty to abide by the sad principle of collective responsibility. This duty arises from the oath Hon’ble President of India administers to Hon’ble Prime Minister before entering upon his office under Article 75(4) of the Constitution of India read with Form I set out in the Third Schedule to this Constitution. Hon’ble Prime Minister has a constitutionally bound-duty to abide by the sad principle of collective responsibility. This duty arises from the oath Hon’ble President of India administers to Hon’ble Prime Minister before entering upon his office under Article 75(4) of the Constitution of India read with Form I set out in the Third Schedule to this Constitution. Form I is reproduced below: “I, A.B. do, swear in the name of God/solemnly affirm that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, [that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India,] that I will faithfully and conscientiously discharge my duties as a Minister for the Union and that I will do right to all manner of people in accordance with the constitution and the law, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.” 4. That in exercise of his powers and functions as Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, Sri Narendra Modiji has launched a unique audio programme in Hindi viz Mann Ki Baat through Akashvani with effect from 3 October 2014 and continued the said programme upto 26 August 2018. English rendering of each of the said programme is marked and herewith filed as Annexure A/1(colly). 5. That albeit laudable and valuable, Hon’ble Prime Minister’s programme viz Mann Ki Baat broadcast through Akashvanihas created a confusion in the mind of petitioner and in the mind of every legally illiterate Indian citizen living in the State of Manipur as to the source, scope and nature of Mann Ki Baat. That is to say, the confusion is as to whether the programme viz Mann Ki Baat is a part of the policy decision taken by the Union Cabinet or Hon’ble Prime Minister’s own decision or a programme under Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act 1990 and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder. 6. That the cause of action of this PIL arose on 3rd October 2014 when Hon’ble Prime Minister Sri Narendra Modiji launched the programme and is still continuing within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.” [3] To support his plea of confusion, the petitioner has annexed annexure A/1, the Prime Minister’s first Mann Ki Baat to the Nation on Radio, containing 316 pages (316 x 3 = 948 pages). These are text messages of the address on various dates and as per this compilation, it is from 3.10.2014 to 26.08.2018. These are text messages of the address on various dates and as per this compilation, it is from 3.10.2014 to 26.08.2018. From the reading of this petition, it appears that the petitioner is of the view that this broadcast creates confusion in the minds of the petitioner and in the minds of every illegally illiterate Indian citizen. We fail to understand the meaning of illegal illiterate Indian citizen. This shows the lack of understanding of the petitioner or his counsel. The petitioner wants to know whether it is based on a policy decision of the Government and whether this has been approved by the Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990 Rules and Regulation. [4] At the outset it has to be noticed that the English version of the text is based on the Mann Ki Baat addressed on important dates throughout the year. People from different parts of the country are writing to the Hon’ble Prime Minister, expressing their minds or wishes, either in the form of grievance or in public interest. The Hon’ble Prime Minister responds to the same through the programme. The text refers to details of persons who have written letter to the Hon’ble Prime Minister and the Hon’ble Prime Minister’s response. The programme aims to deliver the Prime Minister's voice to the general masses of India. Since television connection is still not feasible everywhere in India, especially in the remote, rural and less developed regions, radio is chosen as a preferred medium for the programme, due to its broader reach. An estimated 90% of the total Indian population is reached over the medium of radio. Transparency and accountability are the two foundations of a people friendly Government. Transparency and accountability not only hold the people closer to the Government but also leads to an open and transparent Government. It is also to be noticed that since the language in which it is rendered is in Hindi. Therefore, the question of confusion in the minds of the illiterate people cannot be accepted. A major portion of the speech is in relation to the letters written by citizens from all over the country. It is obvious that they are aware of the issues they have raised to bring to the knowledge of the Prime Minister. They will be quite capable of understanding the response by the Hon’ble Prime Minister. A major portion of the speech is in relation to the letters written by citizens from all over the country. It is obvious that they are aware of the issues they have raised to bring to the knowledge of the Prime Minister. They will be quite capable of understanding the response by the Hon’ble Prime Minister. Therefore the petitioner’s plea of illiterate Indian citizen is objectionable. [5] We note that the confusion is in the mind of the petitioner and none else. Petitioner needs more clarity and better focus. [6] Be that as it may, the programme, Mann ki Baat, has been going on for so many years and if, the petitioner has any specific doubt as to how this program is conducted he can very well address the Government to give the source of their power to use the media for the said programme. Instead of that, filing of a PIL, merely based on an allegation of confusion, cannot be countenanced. [7] A reading of the various speeches rendered by the Hon’ble Prime Minister makes it clear that wide variety of subjects are touched by the Hon’ble Prime Minister on the basis of queries and letters from citizens from all over the country and sometimes from other parts of the world. In a people’s democracy, we find no error in the Prime Minister’s addressing the people to express his/her views so that people may better understand the nature of governance. [8] The fault, as expressed by the petitioner appears to be from a disgruntled source. The approach appears to be more out of animosity or personal grudge. We do need wish to give any further thought on this petition. Accordingly, the PIL is dismissed.