SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 35

S. H. KAPADIA, K. S. P. RADHAKRISHNA, SWATANTER KUMAR
Manzoor Ali Khan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocate Appeared
For the Petitioners:Dinesh Kr. Garg, V.P. Singh, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Manjit Singh, Additional Advocate General, Shankar Chillarge, Additional Government Advocate (Maharashtra) [S.W.A. Qadri, Rekha Pandey, S.S. Rawat, Ashok Bhan, Padmalakshimi Nagam, Arvind Kr. Sharma, Rahul Kaushik, Radha Rai, Sunita Sharma, Mukesh Verma, D.S. Mahra, Anil Katiyar, C.S. Khan, Ranbir Singh Yadav, Arun K. Sinha, Sanjay R. Hegde, Jatinder Kr. Bhatia, V.K. Verma, Sushma Suri, B. Krishna Prasad, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, Rituraj Biswas, Anil Shrivastav, Riku Sarma (for M/s. Corporate Law Group), P.V. Dinesh, P. Rajesh, V.J. Jithin, Kh. Nobin Singh, Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Avijit Bhattarchajee, Sarbani Kar, D.D. Purkayastha, Bidyabrata Acharyya, Ranjan Mukherjee, S. Bhowmick, S.C. Ghosh, Arun Mathur, Yousuf Khan, Avneesh Arputham (for M/s. Aruputham, Aruna & Co.), R. Sathish, S. Geetha, Sumita Hazarika, V.G. Pragasam, S.J. Aristotle, Praburamasubramanian, Manoj K. Mishra, Rashmi Singh, Rajeev K. Dubey, Kamlendra Mishra, Pragyan Pradip Sharma, P.V. Yogeswaran, V.N. Raghupathy, Edward Belho, K. Enatoli Sema, Asha G. Nair, H. Wahi, Nupur Kanungo, A. Subhashini, Kamal Mohan Gupta, Advocates.

Judgment :

1. The present petition is filed in public interest. It seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Union of India, various States in India and public sector undertakings (PSUs) to produce the respective records regarding expenditure incurred for giving advertisements. According to the petitioners, the said expenditure is a wasteful expenditure. According to the petitioners, such advertisements are given to enhance images of political leaders. In short, the petitioners seek to challenge the authority of the Union of India and various States as also PSUs, in the matter of their incurring expenditure on advertisements.

2. We find no merit in this petition. Firstly, we find that detailed guidelines have been framed by the Union of India – Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity (DAVP), which is the nodal agency of the Government of India for advertising by various ministries and organizations of the Government of India. Similarly, in each State there is a Department of Information which is the nodal agency for releasing advertisements. Since guidelines have been framed by DAVP as well as the Director of Information in each of the States, we see no reason to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top