( 1 ) ALL these petitions have been beard together,as same questions either in, support or against the scheme for allotment oftime slots on satellite channels of Doordarshan arise therein. Pleadings are, however, complete in C. W. P. 3248/93 filed by Bannett, Coleman and Co. Limited which we will generally refer to in the course of this judgment.

( 2 ) CIVIL Writ Petition No. 3104/93 was filed by Home Communication Network Ltd. and another in 6/07/1993. In this a restraint order is sought on the respondents not to deviate from the basis of first come first served (FCFS for short) set out in the scheme, and for setting aside the decision order dated 3/07/1993 seeking to change the FCFS basis of allotment of time slots. Civil Writ Petition 3117/93 was filed by Dr. Arvind Gupta also on 6/07/1993. In this the petitioner prayed for a writ that effect not be given to public notice inviting applications from "interested applicants" forpreferential allotment of time slots to different class of applicants on FCFSbasis, or any other basis and for setting aside the impugned public notice. A direction is also sought against the respondents for laying down clear,intelligible and fair standards for granting licences for time slots to "eligibleapplicants" on satellite channels. And lastly, a direction to the respondentsto lay down the eligibility criteria for interested applicants seeking licencesfor transmitting programmes on satellite and metro channels. Other fivewrit petitions (CWP No. 3248/93 by Bennett, Coleman and Co Ltd. ; CWPNo. 3275/93 by Hindustan Times Ltd. ; CWP No. 3370/93 by Vijay Malhotraof Sri Productions : CWP 3376/93 by Indus Television : and CWP 3402/93by Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. were filed later in the secondand third week of July 1993. In these five petitions the principal prayersare that the criteria of F. C. F. S. basis for allotment of time slots be quashedand that a proper eligibility criteria be laid for allotment of time slots takinginto account the experience, the track record, the financial backing as wellas quality of product produced by the applicants. In one of these petitionsthere is also a prayer that a direction be issued to the respondents not tomake allotment on the basis of Random Number Generation method ( rng for short) and to formulate a fair, reasonable and just scheme for thepurpose. The respondents are : Director General, Doordarsban ; Union ofindia through the Secretary in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting; and the Deputy Director General, Satellite Channels, Doordarshan.

( 3 ) THE immediate cause for filing these writ petitions was thatthough under the scheme the date for receiving the applications for allotment of time slots on satellite channels of Doordarshan was 5/07/1993 butthe queue outside the office of Doordarshan started forming on 23/06/1993 itself. The basis of allotment at that time was FCFS.

( 4 ) DOORDARSHAN is a department of the Central Government underthe charge of the Director General in the Ministry of Information andbroadcasting for television broadcasting and has no independent entity of itsown.

( 5 ) THE scheme in question had been formulated in pursuance of, aswould appear) a policy decision of the Central Government that licences begranted to private producers for showing their programmes on televisionfor general reception in the country, telecasting to be done by Doordarshanthrough satellite. This way the respondents also endeavoured to earnmaximum revenue for the country. The scheme, it has been contended bythe respondents, does not pertain to the Prime Channel of Doordarshan, oreven to the Metro Channel, i. e. , the second channel in the four metropolisof Delhi. Bombay, Calcutta and Madras when for some time in a day themetro Channel is not linked with satellite. Except for this, programmeson the Entertainment Channel on the satellite can also be seen on the Metrochannel.

( 6 ) THE scheme thus now framed is in pursuance of decisio