On July 28, 2025, the Government of Maharashtra issued a Government Resolution (GR) introducing strict social media usage guidelines for its employees. Aimed at curbing data leaks, unauthorized disclosures, and the misuse of government identity online, this policy applies to all public servants including those on deputation, contract, or working in Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs).
Core Provisions
One of the most discussed aspects of the guidelines is the ban on any criticism of government policies whether central or state on any social media platform. This includes even personal opinions posted on private accounts, thus effectively silencing government employees from making any adverse remarks about administrative decisions or policy implementation. According to the GR, any violation may lead to disciplinary action under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1979.
The GR further mandates that government employees separate personal and official social media accounts. Personal accounts must not carry government logos, building images, uniforms, or designations, except in the profile photo. This seeks to ensure that personal opinions are not mistaken for official positions and to prevent confusion among citizens.
Account Ownership and Handovers
A key logistical instruction under the resolution is the proper handover of official accounts. When a government employee is transferred, retired, or reassigned, they must ensure a formal transfer of all government-related social media accounts, groups, and pages. This is to prevent loss of access, continuity issues, or misuse of official accounts by former employees.
Ban on Document Sharing and Messaging Apps
The guidelines strictly prohibit sharing internal documents, orders, or images of government meetings on social media even partially unless prior written approval is obtained. The aim is to prevent sensitive data from being circulated in the public domain.
Moreover, government employees are barred from using social media platforms or apps that are banned either by the State or Central Government, even in their personal capacity. Messaging platforms such as WhatsApp or Telegram may only be used for internal communication, not for broadcasting press notes or departmental updates.
No Self-Promotion
Another important clause is the prohibition on self-promotion. Government officers are discouraged from presenting achievements as personal victories. Instead, any social media post about official duties must highlight the department, scheme, or initiative not individual contributions. This move is intended to prevent misuse of public office for personal branding, especially with upcoming elections in mind.
Political and Public Reaction
The guidelines have sparked a nationwide debate. Congress MP Pratibha Dhanorkar called the GR “draconian” and accused the government of stifling free speech. She argued that public servants, too, have a constitutional right to express opinions, provided they maintain official decorum.
On the other hand, BJP MLC Parinay Fuke defended the policy, asserting that it was necessary to preserve the dignity of government institutions. According to him, unchecked social media usage had led to inappropriate glorification, policy leaks, and even disinformation campaigns.
Constitutional and Legal Concerns
The resolution sits at the intersection of Article 19(1)(a) the right to freedom of speech—and reasonable restrictions outlined under Article 19(2). While public employees do accept a degree of speech limitation upon joining government service, critics argue that this policy may be overbroad, vague, and prone to misuse.
There are also concerns that these provisions could discourage whistleblowing or prevent honest administrative feedback. In a healthy democracy, bureaucratic neutrality does not always mean silence, and constructive criticism should not be mistaken for dissent.
Global Comparisons
Other democratic countries also issue social media guidance for public servants. The UK Civil Service, for example, advises neutrality and confidentiality but allows employees to express personal views within limits. Canada’s policy is similar. What makes Maharashtra’s rules distinct is their strict enforcement, blanket bans, and detailed penalties.
Conclusion
Maharashtra’s new social media policy seeks to instill discipline, protect data, and maintain institutional neutrality. While the intent behind the regulation is understandable especially in an age of rapid digital communication the execution raises legitimate concerns about freedom of expression, clarity, and proportionality.
A more balanced policy would involve consultation with stakeholders, clear definitions of “criticism,” and safeguards against arbitrary enforcement. As government and society become increasingly digital, the line between professional duty and personal liberty will need constant revisiting.
Sources:
- NDTV: Maharashtra Social Media Guidelines
- Indian Express: Govt bans criticism on social media
- Hindustan Times: Disciplinary actions for violations
More Current Affairs: https://learnproacademy.in/updates/