Compliance with the Advertisement Policy of the Government of India, the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, and the principles of natural justice in the suspension process.

( 1 ) THE petitioners in these five writ petitions are small newspapers registered with the Registrar of Newspapers for India (RNI) from different dates having different registration numbers. They are also registered under the provisions of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867. The Director General, Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity (respondent No. 2 herein) (for short `the DAVP ) is entrusted with the duty and responsibility of release of Government advertisement to the newspapers registered with the RNI and empanelled with it. For the purpose of release of advertisements, it executes a rate contract with the registered newspapers and on that basis the advertisements are released to such newspapers from time to time.

( 2 ) ALL these petitioners were empanelled with respondent no. 2 and the rate contracts issued by respondent No. 2 were extended upto September, 2002. However respondent No. 2 stopped releasing advertisements to the petitioners from 25th July, 2002. Thereafter, these petitioners received on different dates in August, 2002 letters from the DAVP informing that for the reasons contained in these letters, it was not possible to make use of their publication for release of Government advertisements in future. The basic reason given in all these letters is that their newspapers were not available in the market/news agency counters as per the report available in the directorate. It may, however, be appropriate to reproduce the language used in these letters in respect of each petitioner.

( 3 ) IN CWP Nos. 5978 and 5979/2002, the petitioners received letter dated 6th August, 2002 to the following effect:

"a team of DAVP Officers visited the premises of your publications for spot check. It was observed that the paper titled Vyapar Udyog and Samachar from Delhi was not published in the press, whose address has been given in the medical particular form and as given in imprint line. The said newspaper was also not available in the market/news agency counters. Under the circumstances, it is not possible to make use of your publication for release of Government advertisement in future. "

( 4 ) IN CWP Nos. 6086 and 6088/2002 vide communication dated 5th August, 2002 it was stated as under:

" Since you have not submitted any authenticated declaration regarding change of printing address, this is violation of PRB Act 1867. Moreover, the newspaper was not available in market/news agency counter as per report available in the Directorate. The news address of the press indicated in your letter i. e. E-173, Industrial Area, Rohtak was also visited by a team of DAVP officials at about 8. 30 PM on 11. 7. 2002. As per their report "premises was locked". Premises is half finished brick structure. There was no plastering, no electricity and no activity there. Under the circumstances it is not possible to make use of your daily for release of Government advertisements in future. "

( 5 ) IN CWP No. 7802/02 it is stated that from July, 2002 respondent No. 2 has stopped releasing advertisements and although the petitioner submitted all documents for renewal of the rate contract which was expired on 30th September, 2002 no decision was conveyed by 30th September, 2002 and no advertisement released thereafter even when representations were made.

( 6 ) IT may be mentioned at this stage that all the newspapers belong to the same group. Challenge against the impugned action of the respondent no. 2 in not releasing the advertisements is identical. In all these writ petitions, it is alleged that these newspapers being independent and fortnight publications having only the interest of readers and general public to information as its aim and objective, they pursue a policy of free, fearless and impartial reporting. One of the group publications, namely, Dainik Himachal Sewa published a news report against Smt. Sushma Swaraj, who was the then Information and Broadcasting Minister, in its issue of Wednesday, the 10th July,