The Delhi High Court has declared that news agencies don’t fall within the jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution. It is since an organization engaged in news distribution cannot be considered performing a ‘public role.’
The ruling was issued by a single-judge bench chaired by Justice Yashwant Varma while rejecting a petition submitted by Prakash Singh, who claimed racial discrimination and harassment by the French news agency ‘Agence France Presse.’
Even if the media organizations were established by an Act of Parliament, their transmission of news cannot be considered a ‘public role,’ according to the High Court.
Delhi high court said that such organizations are not susceptible to High Court writ jurisdiction under Article 226. It is accessible only as a public law remedy and not for private wrongs.
On the petitioner’s argument that the respondent news agency was established by a law passed by the French Parliament, the High Court stated that while the second respondent was established by an Act passed by the French Parliament, a newspaper or an agency engaged in news dissemination cannot be considered to be performing a public function.
It was also argued that its fundamental activities would demonstrate that it was an independent civil organization formed to gather comprehensive and objective information in France and abroad and make that information available to consumers in return for money.
The Court also remarked that the petitioner’s service contract with the French news agency lacked any legislative flavor.
In this respect, the Court cited the Supreme Court rulings in Ramakrishna Mission & Anr vs. Kago Kunya & Ors. and Binny Ltd vs. Sadasivan.
It said that, although writs might be issued against any private entity or person, particularly in light of the wording employed in Article 226, the scope of mandamus was restricted to executing public duties exclusively.
The High Court ruled that it could not maintain the petition.
