Accreditation to Scribes on the Basis of Newspaper’s Language: HC Quashes Rule
Hyderabad:A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court quashed the rule relating to accreditation to journalists made on the basis of the newspaper’s language. The panel, speaking through Chief Justice Alok Aradhe, said no justification has been offered in the counter-affidavit for making a criterion for grant of accreditation on the basis of language of a newspaper. If the state government decided to accord the benefit of a welfare scheme, namely, accreditation, to working journalists, it has to be granted on fair, rational and reasonable criteria.
The fair and rational criteria could be the number of copies in circulation or number of pages in circulation of a newspaper or periodical. However, the language of a newspaper, irrespective of number of pages or number of copies in circulation, cannot be reasonable and just criteria for extending the benefit of accreditation. The respondents have failed to offer any explanation for restricting the number of accreditation cards only to Urdu newspapers and periodicals.
The panel also said that it was needless to state that the state government shall formulate the guidelines by taking into account the rational and reasonable standard for granting accreditation to working journalists in Urdu newspapers and periodicals as well as for empaneled satellite news channels within two months. The panel was dealing with a writ plea filed by the Telangana Urdu Working Journalists Union, which assailed the validity of action of the respondents in issuing a GO in 2016 by which allocation of accreditation cards to working journalists has been made on the basis of the language of the newspapers.
The petitioner union is a body registered under the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The petitioner has been constituted to uplift the Urdu journalists to ameliorate their condition at district and mandal levels. The panel prefaced its direction with caution and said it is well settled in law that the courts cannot sit in judgment over the wisdom of the policy evolved by the state government. Interference in exercise of powers of judicial review can be made by a court with a policy decision only on the grounds of mala fides, unreasonableness, arbitrariness or unfairness. The court then proceeded to state that the basis of the accreditation was arbitrary and accordingly allowed the writ petition.
Freedom fighter moves HC for pension
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of the union and state governments in rejecting the pension claims of a freedom fighter. Kadari Ilaiah had filed a plea claiming pension under Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980. The petitioner alleged that despite the state government submitting a re-verification report, the representation of the petitioner for grant of pension was rejected by the respondent authorities. The judge remarked that the repeated rejection of the benefits under the scheme affected its very purpose and also reflected the respondent’s disregard in recognising the participation of a freedom fighter in the freedom struggle. The judge directed the respondents to reconsider the representation of the petitioner and posted the matter for further adjudication.
Consider representation before demolition: HC
Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court directed the municipal authorities not to interfere with the property of a school running from 1956 without passing orders on an explanation offered by it. The judge disposed of a writ plea filed by Rajasthan Hindi Vidyalaya (RHV) Concept School, Charminar, challenging the order directing removal of alleged unauthorised construction. It was the case of the petitioner that the school was functioning since 1956 and imparting education to children from the lower strata. The petitioner contended that right in front of the school there has been a badminton court for about 25 to 30 years and no objections were raised by the GHMC. The petitioner argued that the reply was issued to the GHMC showcause notice but without considering it speaking orders were passed, directing the removal of alleged unauthorised construction. The judge set aside the speaking order, and directed the GHMC to pass order considering the reply given by the school.
Contempt notice to TMREIS and principal secretary
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to Telangana Minority Residential Educational Institutions Society (TMREIS) and its principal secretary in a contempt case filed by post graduate teachers. The judge took on file a contempt case filed by M. Uma Rani and 23 others, who alleged that the respondent authorities wantonly failed to comply with the interim direction passed earlier by the judge. Earlier, the judge, while dealing with a writ plea complaining discrimination by non-preparation of common merit list and seniority list for general institutions and women institutions in respondent institutions, directed the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. The petitioners allege that despite interim directions, the respondent authorities had failed to consider the representations of the petitioners.
Guest teachers seek regularisation
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of the principal secretary for Telangana BC welfare department and others in not regularising the services of guest teachers. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Sardar Mohammed and 26 others. The petitioners alleged that despite rendering services for several years, the respondents were not regularising their services. The petitioners alleged that the non-consideration of their representations was illegal, arbitrary and unjust. The judge directed the government pleader representing the respondent authorities to file their response and posted the matter after two weeks. The judge directed the respondent authorities to consider the representations of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders.
