Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 76596

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, J, SHAJI P.CHALY, J
KERALA UNION OF WORKING JOURNALISTS – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WA NO. 212 OF 2022 | WA NO. 214 OF 2022 | WA NO. 218 OF 2022 | WP(C) 3670/2022 | WP(C) 3663/2022 | WP(C) 3265/2022

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. DUSHYANT DAVE (SR.), K.JAJU BABU (SR.), M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, BRIJESH MOHAN, SACHIN RAMESH
For the Respondents: SRI. AMAN LEKHI, ADDL. SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI. MANU S., ASG OF INDIA, SRI. JAISHANKAR V. NAIR, CGC, SRI. SUVIN R. MENON, CGC, SRI. DAYASINDHU SREEHARI, CGC

The court affirmed that national security concerns can justify the revocation of media licenses, prioritizing public order over individual rights, under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21 - Writ Appeal - The appellants challenge the revocation of the uplinking and downlinking permission for 'Media One' on grounds of national security based on intelligence inputs. The court found the government's actions justified given the serious security concerns presented. (Paras 10, 37, 70)

(B) Press Freedom - National Security - The court reiterated that while freedom of the press is critical, it must be balanced against national security concerns, emphasizing the importance of public order and security over individual rights when necessary. (Paras 61, 70)

Facts of the case:
The appellants challenged the Union Government's decision to revoke permissions for 'Media One' due to prior denials of security clearance leveraging intelligence inputs. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting relied on these inputs leading to the decision. (Paras 6, 10)

Findings of Court:
The court confirmed the revocation was lawful due to substantial security risks involving the company's management and operations, adhering to statutory guidelines. (Paras 70)

Issues: The key issue was whether the denial of renewal was arbitrary or justified based on national security concerns. (Paras 61-70)

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that national security justifies not disclosing specific reasons for action taken against a media company, reaffirming that the government must protect public order even at the cost of individual rights. (Paras 70)

Result: Writ Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. legal basis for appeals against government revocation (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. background on permit renewal application and denial reasons (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. details on security clearance and prior denials (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. arguments on procedural adherence for renewal denial (Para 20 , 21 , 24)
5. balancing national security with freedom of press (Para 36 , 41 , 43)
6. importance of national security in broadcast permissions (Para 59 , 61 , 68)
7. final decision and rationale for denial of renewal (Para 69 , 71)

JUDGMENT

[W.A.Nos. 212, 214 & 218 of 2022]

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

The captioned writ appeals are filed by the writ petitioners challenging the common judgment of the writ court in W.P.(C) Nos. 3670, 3663 and 3265 of 2022 dated 08.02.2022.

2. W.A. No. 212 of 2022 is filed by the Kerala Union of Working Journalists and others. W.A.No. 214 of 2022 is filed by the employees of the news channel by name 'Media One' and W.A. No. 218 of 2022 is filed by M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited, which is managing and controlling 'Media One', a news and current affairs channel.

3. The subject issue raised in the appeals is one and the same in regard to an order passed by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India dated 31.01.2022, whereby the permission granted to M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited for uplinking and downlinking a 'News and Current Affairs TV Channel' namely 'Media One' is revoked with immediate effect and accordingly, the name of the said channel is removed from the list of permitted channels. It was, thus, challenging the legality and correctness of the said order, the writ petitions were filed.

4. For the purpose of disposal of the appeals, we are relying upon the pleadings and documents in W.A. No. 218 of 2022; however, in the course of discussion, if the pleadings and documents in the other appeals are relied upon, it will be mentioned accordingly.

5. The basic facts for the disposal of the appeals are as follows:

M/s.Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, which owns 'Media One', a TV Channel in the field of broadcasting news and current affairs. The first respondent— Union of India had granted permission enabling M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited to uplink and downlink the TV programmes, and the permission was valid upto 029.09.2021, evident from the communications dated 30.09.2011, 30,09.2011 and 11.07.2019 produced as Exts.P1, P1(a) and P1(b) respectively in W.A. No. 214 of 2022. Ext. P1 is the permission granted to the Managing Director of M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited, Calicut, Kerala, to uplink news and current affairs through 'Media One' from India for a period of 10 years. Ext. P1(a) is the permission given to the referred company to downlink the news and the current affairs through 'Media One' in India for a period of 5 years. Ext. P1(b) is the renewal of permission granted to M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited for downlinking for a further period of 5 years from 30.09.2016 to 29.09.2021 i.e., making it co-terminus with uplinking permission.

6. It seems, an application was filed by M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited, to renew the uplinking and downlinking permission for a period of 10 years, on 03.05.2021, since the permissions were due to expire on 29.09.2021. Anyhow, the application was not considered before the expiry of the permissions. However, the appellant company was apparently permitted to continue its activities. While so, on 05.01.2022, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, issued Ext. P1, show cause notice to M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited pointing out that even though the company, as per letter dated 03.05.2021, applied for renewal of permission, Ministry of Home Affairs informed that the security clearance has been denied in the past to the proposals of the company and the security clearance may be considered as denied in the present case also.

7. Anyhow, it is st

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 76596

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMS.MANIKUMAR, CJ, J, SHAJI P.CHALY, JKERALA UNION OF WORKING JOURNALISTS – AppellantVersusUNION OF INDIA – RespondentWA NO. 212 OF 2022 | WA NO. 214 OF 2022 | WA NO. 218 OF 2022 | WP(C) 3670/2022 | WP(C) 3663/2022 | WP(C) 3265/2022

The court affirmed that national security concerns can justify the revocation of media licenses, prioritizing public order over individual rights, under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

Cases Referred (11)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, J, SHAJI P.CHALY, J
KERALA UNION OF WORKING JOURNALISTS – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WA NO. 212 OF 2022 | WA NO. 214 OF 2022 | WA NO. 218 OF 2022 | WP(C) 3670/2022 | WP(C) 3663/2022 | WP(C) 3265/2022