ML Verma/ Shimla, Feb 3,
Even as winter tightens its grip over Himachal Pradesh, the political climate in the state has turned distinctly warmer, with tensions between the political executive and sections of the bureaucracy once again coming to the fore.
The latest flashpoint is a privilege notice moved by Ayush, Youth Services & Sports and Law Minister Yadvinder Goma against the Deputy Commissioner of Mandi, alleging a violation of protocol and disregard for a constitutional office.
Adding deeper political context to the controversy is the fact that similar concerns over bureaucratic overreach and administrative indifference have been raised in the past by leaders aligned with the Virbhadra Singh school of thought within the Congress party.
As the controversy deepens, a former Congress MLA belonging to the same ideological school has come out strongly in support of the minister. In a detailed public statement, this leader defended the importance of protocol for ministers, asserting that established norms apply uniformly, irrespective of party, state, caste, or religion.
He maintained that adherence to protocol is not a matter of personal ego but a question of respect for constitutional offices held by elected representatives.
Bharti argued that administrative conduct during official programmes is governed by the Constitution, the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, and government-issued protocols, not by individual discretion. He cautioned that undermining the protocol accorded to ministers weakens democratic accountability, as ministers derive their authority from the people’s mandate.
However, several former senior bureaucrats have questioned the legal and procedural basis of the privilege notice.
Former HAS officer D. K. Manta stated that the administration had already deputed the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) and Additional Deputy Commissioner to receive the minister, and there is no mandatory provision requiring the Deputy Commissioner to personally receive a cabinet minister.
Speaking to a news agency, former Director of Public Relations Dr B. D. Sharma said that under established protocol, the Deputy Commissioner is required to receive the Governor or the Chief Minister, while cabinet ministers are not covered under such protocol obligations.
Adding to the debate, former Shimla Municipal Commissioner H. N. Kashyap questioned the practicality of demanding special privilege.
“A Deputy Commissioner cannot be expected to receive two or three ministers visiting a district simultaneously,” he said, adding that the DC had attended the Republic Day function on January 26, which itself rules out any deliberate intent to insult the minister.
Meanwhile, the controversy has also triggered public criticism, with local voices in Mandi suggesting that if there was any administrative lapse, the minister could have sought a clarification or issued a show-cause notice instead of invoking legislative privilege.
The episode has reignited a broader political discourse in the state on whether the alleged lapse genuinely amounts to a breach of protocol, or whether the privilege notice reflects deeper unrest within the ruling establishment—particularly among leaders who feel increasingly sidelined by an assertive bureaucracy.
About the Author
The HimachalScape Bureau comprises seasoned journalists from Himachal Pradesh with over 25 years of experience in leading media conglomerates such as The Times of India and United News of India. Known for their in-depth regional insights, the team brings credible, research-driven, and balanced reportage on Himachal’s socio-political and developmental landscape.