R.K.CHOTTANI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition has been filed seeking for the reliefs in the nature of direction to the second Respondent to consider and grant provisional State-level accreditation, recognition to the Petitioners immediately under 1988 Rules till they are granted State-level accreditation and direction to Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to consider, grant forthwith State level accreditation/recognition to the Petitioners under the Himachal Pradesh Press CorRespondents' Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 1988. The Petitioners also seek for the further relief to declare Rule 8(b)(2) of the Himachal Pradesh Press CorRespondents Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 1991 as illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and restrain Respondent Nos. 1 and 4 from publishing the 1991 Rules in the Himachal Pradesh Government Gazette. Even at the threshold, we may point out that the relief sought for irrespect of 1991 Rules, as noticed above, does not call for our consideration for decision in view of the fact situation that the said Rules have not been so far notified and have therefore, not come into force and no exercise in futility would be undertaken by deciding the claims made by the Petitioners in respect of 1991 Rules, which are yet to come into force. As a matter of fact, in the reply filed by the Respondents one of the preliminary objections taken is that the Rules in force are only the Himachal Pradesh Press CorRespondents' Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 1988 and that the new Himachal Pradesh Press CorRespondents' Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 1991 will come into force only after they have been published in the Himachal Pradesh Rajpatra. Hence, our consideration is confined to the other reliefs claimed, based on the 1988 Rules only.

(2.) The first of the Petitioners is said to be the editor of 'Himachal Ki Pukar', a weekly said to be published since January 1989 from Shimla. The second Petitioner is said to be the news editor of 'Shimla Times' which is also Anr. weekly said to be published from Shimla since December 1991. It is also claimed by this Petitioner that from the year 1985 to December 1991, he was the editor of 'Shimla Times', a weekly. The third Petitioner is said to be the editor of 'News Post', yet Anr. weekly said to be published since 1985 from Shimla. The three newspapers, noted above, are said to be duly registered with the Registrar of Newspapers, New Delhi. The Himachal Pradesh Government has notified the Himachal Pradesh Press CorRespondents-Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as '1988 Rules') in supersession of the Himachal Pradesh Press Accreditation and Recognition Rules, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as '1986 Rules'). The 1988 Rules were said to have been published in the Government Gazette dated 28.4.1988 and came into force with effect from the said date. The" 1988 Rules defines 'Accredited CorRespondent' to mean a corRespondent who has been granted recognition in accordance with the procedure prescribed by those rules and further provides that there will be two types of cards, one denoting accreditation and the other denoting recognition and that cards will be issued to those only who fulfil the conditions laid down in the relevant Rule. The Rules also contemplate the Constitution of a Press Accreditation Committee to which all claims for accreditation and recognition of Press CorRespondents shall be referred to and the decision taken by the said Committee will be considered to be final so far as the Government is concerned and that such Committee shall meet once in a year. The levant procedure for accreditation as also the eligibility conditions thereto e also prescribed in the said Rules, which, it can be pointed out at this stage, are not Rules made under any statute but made in exercise of executive and administrative power which vest with the State Government by virtue of Article 162 of the Constitution of India. Since all the three Petitioners are admittedly concerned and connected with weeklies, it could be seen from the Rules that Rule 8(1)(b) governs the claims in respect of weeklies and other periodicals. It is seen that the qualification for consideration for granting accreditation is that the weekly or fortnightly concerned should be published without any break between one publication and other and that the circulation of it should not be less than 1000 copies and at least half of the circulation should be in Himachal Pradesh. The Rule further stipulates in case of Weeklies/ Fortnightlies, accreditation will be given to only one person of the State, who may be the editor of the paper concerned or its corRespondent. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 8 mandates that all those editors of weeklies/fortnightlies, who have been given State level/District level accreditation prior to the enforcement of the Rules shall hold those accreditation till they continue to be the editors of such weeklies. Besides, the rules make it clear that the accreditation granted will be personal and shall lapse as soon they discontinue to be the editors. Rule 11 provides for recognition and contemplates an application for grant of recognition being made for the State Headquarters by a corRespondent through the editor of the newspaper. The procedure which has to be observed for granting such accreditation is also laid down in detail. The Rules also provide for disaccreditation as well as derecognition apart from making provision for periodical review of accredited/recognised corRespondents lists. Rule 20 deals with the grant of provisional accreditation and recognition pending consideration of the claim by the Press Accreditation Committee if a corRespondent or editor fulfils all the conditions enumerated for the grant of accreditation or recognition.

(3.) The grievance of the Petitioners is that though they were eligible and entitled to State level accreditation/recognition under the 1988 Rules, they have been given only District level accreditation and recognition despite repeated applications made and reminders sent for according them State level accreditation as per the Rules. According to them, their weeklies have more than 2000 circulation to their credit, out of which half of the number are circulated in the entire State of Himachal Pradesh. They also point out that the State level accreditation and recognition has been given to the editors of the weeklies, such as, Shri Ram Ratta Pa(sic)-Himachal Darpan, (ii) Shri D.P. Uniyal-Himalaya Times, (iii) Shri B.L. Sood-Parvat Ki Goonj and (iv) Shri Kameshwar Pandit - Himachal Janta. A grievance is made about the circular dated 5.12.1991, said to have been issued by the second Respondent, declaring that the Petitioners have been given District-level accreditation and recognition whereas four persons, noticed above, have been given State-level accreditation and recognition. The further contention of the Petitioners in their petition is that according of State-level accreditation and recognition carries higher status and better facilities in addition to those facilities which are accorded in favour of those who were granted District-level accreditation and recognition and the action of the Respondents in granting only District-level accreditation and recognition to the Petitioners in contrast to those four persons, who are similarly situated like the Petitioners, who have been otherwise granted State level accreditation and recognition constitutes not only hostile discrimination but also amounts to an arbitrary and unreasonable Act, which cannot be justified in law.