SATHIADEV

These two writ appeals are preferred against the common judgment of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohan dt. 15-02-1988 rendered in W.P. Nos. 1166, 1181 and 1229 of 1988. W.A. No. 469 of 1988 is filed against W.P. No. 1166 of 1988, while W.A. No. 488 of 1988 is filed against W.P. No. 1181 of 1988.

2. W.P. No. 1166 of 1988 was filed by Mr. P. Jagajeevanram, a journalist, who publishes an English Fortnightly "why not" and Tamil fortnightly "Sathiyavetkai", and another called "Cinema Studio". He is an Industrialist manufacturing T. V. sets with brand name 'Jeevan'. He belongs to Scheduled Caste community. He has preferred the Writ Petition as a public interest litigation for issue of a Writ of Prohibition directing the respondents 1 to 4 to prohibit the fifth respondent from exhibiting the Tamil film 'Ore Oru Gramathilae

"throughout this country for its public exhibition, and to pass such further or other orders or directions in the nature of any writ as may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

3. W.P. No. 1181 of 1988 was filed by Dr. M. Deivanayagam, President of the Research Movement of Dravidanism, for issue of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing respondents 1 to 3, therein to revoke the Cinematograph Certification granted to the fourth respondent.

4. On these writ petitions along with another coming up for admission, the learned Judge in admission stage dismissed them, by holding that the movie in question certainly portrays the life and society with some of its foibles, and that does not mean that the certification requires to be withdrawn or it can be prohibited. Aggrieved with the rejection of the writ petitions 'in limine', two of the petitioners have preferred these two writ appeals.

5. It is claimed that the dismissal of the writ petitions in this nature 'in limine' was not justified on several grounds of which some of them are :" *

They involve questions of law, procedural flaws, if the film is exhibited, it will disturb public peace and tranquillity in this State; it is a calculated attempt to denigrade the Constitutional provisions on Reservation; it advocates commission of offences like forgery, conspiracy, cheating by impersonation with impunity; it is impregnated with dangerous tendencies and practices to be adopted by Forward Community, it degrades Independent India and praises British Rule. Dr. Ambedkar, the architect of the Constitution is character assassinated; the mala fides alleged ought to have been gone into, etc.

6. It is emphasised that, when nearly 100 writ petitions are admitted in a day involving minor points; a matter of this nature in which several lakhs of depressed people, who have not attained any equality whatsoever in spite of four decades of Independence, having come before Court expressing their anguish about themselves being denigrated in a medium of this nature; as repeatedly held by the Supreme Court, the writ petitions ought to have been admitted and the claims made therein investigated thereupon. It is common knowledge that public agitations have been going on, and several persons have courted arrest, against screening of this film and when the producer had taken two months to announce the release of the picture after certification, this was not such an urgent matter in which the Court should have hurriedly disposed of the matter, as if the producer would be prejudiced by the matter being considered by Court. It is not as if the release of the picture could not brook a short delay, till the matter is considered by Court on merits. Lastly, without even seeing the film, a conclusion could not have been arrived at that the movie in question certainly portrays the life and society with some of it's foibles and, therefore, the appellants claim that they have to file these Writ Appeals.

7. In the supporting affidavit in W.P. No. 1166 of 1988, it is stated as follows :-

The Tamil film "Ore Oru Gramathilae" is entirely a caricature and chara