Back
2021 Supreme(HP) 181
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, J.
Vijay Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. and others - Respondents
CWP No. 7487 of 2014
Decided on : 09-04-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Mr. Vinod Thakur, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Dy. A.G.
Point of Law: Freedom of press - Accreditation of petitioner - By accreditation offered by State Government to so called "journalists", who in real sense are not journalists but only enjoy facilities accorded and available to accredited journalists.
Headnote:
H.P. Press Correspondents Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 2002 - Rule 4 and 14 - Writ of certiorari - Disaccreditation or Derecognition of Correspondent – Stopping publication of the tenders and classified ads of the government – Seeking direction to respondents to quash and set-aside the order passed by the State Level Accreditation Committee on thereby directing the respondents to quash and set-aside the order passed by the State Level Accreditation Committee or renew accreditation of petitioner
Finding of the court: Primary function of the press to provide comprehensive and objective information of all aspects of the country's political social, economic and cultural life. It has an educative and mobilizing role to play. It plays an important role in moulding o public opinion and can be an instrument of social change - Respondent No.1 is directed to review and revise the accreditation granted to different categories strictly in accordance with the Rules of 2016 as amended from time to time and thereafter grant fresh accreditation strictly in accordance with these rules. (ii) Amendment be carried out in Rules 2016 making a time bound provision for granting/ refusing accreditation and in case of rejection a provision be made making it mandatory for recording reasons for such rejection
Result: Petition disposed of
JUDGMENT :
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.
Aggrieved by the suspension of his accreditation as a Journalist, the petitioner has filed the instant petition for the grant of following substantive reliefs:
“I. That a writ of certiorari may be issued thereby directing the respondents to quash and set-aside the order passed by the State Level Accreditation Committee on 2nd August, 2014.
(II) That a writ of mandamus may very kindly be issued thereby directing the respondents to renew the accreditation of the petitioner immediately, which is pending since December, 2012.
(III) That a writ of mandamus may further be issued thereby directing the respondents to start allocation publication of government related notices, tenders, classified advertisements in the news weekly of the petitioner, as is being given to other news agencies or dailies etc.
(IV) That the respondents may be issued a direction thereby directing them not to cancel the accreditation of the petitioner.”
2. It is averred that the petitioner is the Editor of the Hindi Weekly namely ‘Him Ujala’ circulated in Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, Uttrakhand, Utter Pradesh and Haryana having around 6,000/- copies circulation per week. The petitioner is working in the field of journalism for the past more than 13 years and has served the interest of the general public by bringing out the true and correct news items. The petitioner news weekly has been given award in the field of journalism by the Government of Himachal Pradesh i.e. ‘Laghu Patrikarita ke Kshetra me Nirantar Parkashan Hetu’, yet the accreditation of the petitioner has been cancelled only on the ground that there are certain FIRs pending against him.
3. It is further averred that the impugned action on the part of the respondent-State in stopping publication of the tenders and classified ads of the government and further not renewing the accreditation of the petitioner, is a direct attack on the freedom of press, inasmuch as, on one hand, the petitioner’s news weekly is being financially crippled as the publication of the government tenders, notices and classified ads is a major source of income of the petitioner so as to enable him to run the news weekly and on the other hand the respondents by not renewing the accreditation, is depriving the petitioner the facilities which are usually available to the correspondents and journalists of the State. It is further averred that the freedom of press is one of the pillars of democrary and it is imperative to ensure that there is no attack on the freedom of press and, therefore, also the action of the respondents-State is illegal.
4. Lastly, it is averred that the petitioner has been targeted because he had been publishing news items regarding corruption and irregularities committed by the political leaders, who had amassed huge wealth.
5. The respondents have filed their reply wherein it is averred that the petitioner’s accreditation and suspension was placed before the Press Accreditation Committee, which is the final authority as per Rule 4 of H.P. Press Correspondents Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 2002 (for short ‘the Rules’) held on 15.07.2014, who after scrutiny of the record decided to keep under suspension the accreditation of the petitioner till the final outcome of the criminal cases pending against him in various Courts.
6. It is further averred that the petitioner was given District Level Accreditation by the respondent-department for ‘Him Ujala Weekly’ which was valid upto 31.12.2012. The Director, Information and Public Relations (respondent No.2) received a complaint dated 06.03.2013 from one Rajinder Thakur, resident of Room No. 10, Ward No.11, Dashmesh Complex, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur wherein it was stated that FIR had been registered against the petitioner.
7. The factual position was accordingly ascertained from the Superintendent of Police, District Sirmaur, through District Public Relations Officer and it was confirmed that the above criminal case by way of FIR N
