Why Maharashtra Govt’s New Social Media Rules Are Sparking Outrage?

The Maharashtra government’s new social media rules for its employees have sparked strong reactions, with critics calling them restrictive and a threat to free speech.

A government resolution (GR) issued on July 28 outlines strict dos and don’ts for all state employees—including those on contract, deputation, or in public sector undertakings—regarding their social media activity.

What the rules say

According to the guidelines, employees are barred from criticizing any state or central government policy, whether current or past, on social media platforms. They are required to keep their personal and official accounts separate, and must refrain from posting photos in uniform, with government vehicles, or inside official buildings on personal profiles.

Furthermore, the resolution also prohibits self-promotional content that highlights an individual’s work-related achievements. In addition, sharing confidential information or official documents online without proper authorisation is strictly forbidden.

Any violation of these rules will invite disciplinary action under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1979. The new policy applies across all major platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, and LinkedIn.

Also Read: ‘Remarkable…’: Sharad Pawar Praises Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis | Republic World

Why the government farmed such rules?

The decision follows rising concerns about employees using official settings or documents for personal promotion. Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis had earlier warned that social media must be used responsibly by government officials, not as a publicity tool. He also mentioned using AI tools to detect violations.

Why it is facing public backlash

The rules have been widely criticised as an attempt to control any form of dissent. Civil rights groups argue it kills free speech and discourages transparency. Media watchdogs have flagged concerns over AI surveillance and narrative control. Citizens have questioned why similar rules don’t apply to elected officials. Legal voices warn the vague language could lead to misuse.

The bigger picture

While the state insists the rules are aimed at discipline and data protection, critics fear they will silence employees and prevent honest conversations. With pushback growing, the debate over free speech and digital rights in government spaces is far from over.