Madras High Court reserves orders on Sun TV’s plea for interim relief
Chennai:The Madras high court has reserved orders on the petitions filed by Sun TV group, which sought a direction to the Union government to permit it to participate in phase-III auctions by allowing it to resubmit the application dated March 20, 2015.
Justice M. Sathyanarayanan reserved orders on the miscellaneous petitions seeking interim relief, after hearing elaborate arguments from both sides. The judge admitted six main petitions filed by the company and its shareholders, which sought to quash the order of the Union ministry of information and broadcasting dated July 15, denying permission to it to participate in the auctions for phase-III of FM radio broadcasting licenses. The judge also ordered issuance of notice, returnable by eight weeks, to the Union government.
When the miscellaneous petit ions came up for hearing, senior counsel P.S. Raman appearing for Sun TV submitted that the Indian Telegraph Act does not stipulate security clearance. As per the notice inviting application, only a company controlled by a person convicted for an offence involving moral turpitude or money laundering or drug trafficking, terrorist activities or declared as insolvent will not be eligible to apply. In this case, there was no conviction. In FM radio, no news was permitted. It can only air entertainment programmes. Then what was the question of national security. By permitting the petitioner to participate in the auction, the bid price will go up. Therefore, public interest will not be affected.
Senior counsel Mohan Parasaran appearing for South Asian company submitted that the government was seeking to take away the petitioner’s right to carry on business. It was an existing company and it was migrating from phase-II to phase-III.
The option for Migration stipulates deposit of 25 per cent non-refundable one time migration fee. The company already paid it. Moreover, in the absence of substantive law (requiring security clearance), the impugned order was violative of Article 19 of the Constitution, he added and pointed out that Attorney General supported the grant of security clearance to the petitioner.
