The Supreme Court recently stated, while hearing a petition filed by the Telugu daily “Eenadu” management against an Andhra Pradesh Government scheme that allegedly promotes the “Sakshi” daily controlled by the Chief Minister, that “it should not really appear that the government is making one newspaper a preferred newspaper.”
The Government Order in question sanctioned Rs.200/- per month from State funds as additional financial support for each Gram Volunteer/Ward Volunteer to purchase one widely circulated Telugu newspaper, which provides them with more knowledge and awareness on contemporary issues as well as information on Government schemes.
Ushodaya Publications, which owns “Eenadu,” claims that the price ceiling in GO is set in such a way that it promotes “Sakshi.” The monthly subscription rate for “Sakshi” was Rs.176.50 per month, while the charge for “Eenadu” was Rs.207.50 per month. It was argued that the government purposefully set the additional grant of Rs.200/- per month to match the monthly subscription charges of “Sakshi” in order to enable the newspaper grow beyond the readership of “Eenadu.” After the Telangana High Court refused to stay the GO, Ushodaya moved before the Supreme Court.
The case was assigned to a bench that included CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala.
Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan, representing for the Government of Andhra Pradesh, stated at the opening that the plea was scheduled to be heard by the High Court on March 21, 2023.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Ushodaya Publications, stated, “This is a matter in which it is virtually a state newspaper. How does a state get its own newspaper? This case should be considered by this court right now. This is far too crucial.”
CJI stated, “Mr Vaidyanathan, You have set the sum at Rs. 200, according to them. Sakshi is said to be the only newspaper that costs less than Rs. 200. It should not appear that the government is favouring one publication over another. As long as the ceiling you set allows a number of newspapers to compete on an equal playing field, that should suffice. Rs 200 is self-evident.”
The bench then inquired about the volunteers. Rohatgi replied that the volunteers were supporters of the government. “You can call them party workers or supporters,” Rohatgi remarked. Vaidyanathan, on the other hand, said that the volunteers were chosen expressly by a selection committee after an interview process.
When the bench asked Vaidyanathan how an equal playing field for all newspapers could be assured, he replied, “We proposed in court that we raise the ceiling limit amount.”
Rohatgi, on the other hand, was not pleased with the suggestion, claiming that the volunteers were still party members who would not choose Eenadu even if the ceiling amount was raised.
CJI replied, “Your entire petition was that I am the only person whose subscription is Rs.206 and thus I want to be in the frame. What is the problem if they take the wind out of your sails and say, Look, we’ll raise the ceiling to Rs 210.”
Justice Narasimha added, “You also want to bite. You are not questioning the scheme’s validity or correctness. The scheme is adequate. But rather than giving it to Sakshi, give it to everyone.”
The bench considered transferring the case to the Delhi High Court, but ultimately decided to list it on April 17, 2023.
The petitioner had initially approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court, requesting an ex parte ad interim order suspending or staying the execution of the challenged GO. The GO in question sanctioned Rs.200/- per month from State funds as additional financial support for each Gram Volunteer/Ward Volunteer to purchase one widely circulated Telugu newspaper, which provides them with more knowledge and awareness on contemporary issues, as well as information on Government schemes. While rejecting the stay petition, the Andhra Pradesh High Court stated that there was no evidence that the GO ordered Gram Volunteers/Ward Volunteers and Village Secretariats/Ward Secretariats to subscribe to “Sakshi.” The petitioner claimed in court that the monthly subscription fee for “Sakshi” was Rs.176.50. On the other side, the monthly fee for “Eenadu” was Rs.207.50. Thus, the government purposefully set the additional grant of Rs.200/- per month to match “Sakshi’s” monthly subscription charges in order to help the newspaper expand beyond the circulation of “Eenadu,” the petitioner’s newspaper.
