REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

News Line Appellant

V/S

UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

JASWANT SINGH NERWAL V. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA V. D.C. AGGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
M.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD,THROUGH THE CHIEF ENGINEER,MPEB V. VIRENDRA KUMAR SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
A K KRAIPAK VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD VS. SUBHAS CHANDRA SINHA [REFERRED TO]
HIRA NATH MISHRA VS. PRINCIPAL RAJENDRA MEDICAL COLLEGE RANCHI [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. LOTUS HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA UNION OF INDIA BISWAROOP CHATTERJEE ACHINTA KUMAR BISWAS NABENDU BOSE LAXMI NARAYAN VS. TULSIRAM PATEL:SADANAND JHA:G P KOUSHAL:UNION OF INDIA:STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
T SHEPHARD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
NEELIMA MISRA VS. HARINDER KAUR PAINTAL [REFERRED TO]
SHANKARSAN DASH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ASHA KAUL VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
TATA CELLULAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
M J SIVANI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. HARISH CHANDRA [REFERRED TO]
M A JACKSON VS. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS [REFERRED TO]
SYNDICATE BANK VS. SHANKAR PAUL [REFERRED TO]
BENNY T D VS. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA SC AND ST EMPLOYEES ASSN VS. A ARTHUR JEEN [REFERRED TO]
ONKAR LAL BAJAJ VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA VS. BHANU LODH [REFERRED TO]
BINNY LTD VS. V SADASIVAN [REFERRED TO]
INDERPREET SINGH KAHLON VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
NOBLE RESOURCES LTD VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA ITDC WORKERS UNION VS. ITDC [REFERRED TO]
SHEKHAR GHOSH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAMCHANDRA MURARILAL BHATTAD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. SOMVIR SINGH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners were admittedly successful in getting empanelled as producers for commissioning of programmes to be telecast on DD -Kashir Channel. The process of empanelment was effected by way of selection on the basis of certain guidelines formulated by Prasar Bharati in consultation with the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the respondents herein. Admittedly, the decided course of action pursuant to the empanelment was to enforce the inter se rights and obligations of the petitioners and Prasar Bharati through a contract. However, even before the contract in question could get executed, certain discrepancies were alleged in the process of empanelment thereby leading to its cancellation. Aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the order cancelling the empanelment of the petitioners. Inter alia, the petitioners have also sought a writ mandamus seeking specific performance of contract decided to be executed into between the parties.

(2.) FACTUAL matrix, as culled out from the pleadings of the parties, is outlined as under:

(3.) IT is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioners that the impugned order of cancellation lies in the teeth of the order of this Court dated 28.3.2007 whereby the respondents were categorically directed to allow the petitioners to make representations before the Fact Finding Authority. Qua the post -decisional hearing afforded to the petitioners, learned Counsel has relied upon K.I. Shephard and Ors. v. : (1988)ILLJ162SC and Shekhar Ghosh v. : (2007)1SCC331 to bring home the point that post -decisional hearing is no hearing in the eye of law as Prasar Bharati was acting under the instruction of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the result of the hearing is a foregone conclusion which vitiates the order under challenge.

Click here to view full judgment.

NEWS LINE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address