Haji Mohd. Majid Qureshi & Anr vs Union Of India & Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 1613 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                    Date of Pronouncement: 27th March, 2017
+      W. P. (C) 12179/2015
       HAJI MOHD. MAJID QURESHI & ANR          ..........Petitioner
                Through : Mr. Raghav Avasthi with Ms. Zohitaksha
                          Shukla, Advocates

                     Versus

       UNION OF INDIA & ANR                               ......Respondents

Through : Mr. Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with Ms. L.

Gangmei, Ms. Namisha Gupta, GP and Mr.Tushar Sannu, Adv. for R-1/UOI

CORAM HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

: MS. G. ROHINI, CHIEF JUSTICE

1. This petition filed by way of Public Interest Litigation has been filed in the background of certain communal incidents stated to have taken place in the recent past resulting in some of the recipients of Sahitya Academi Puraskars returning their awards.

2. It is pleaded by the petitioners that the Sahitya Academi Awards are awarded every year by Sahitya Academi, an autonomous body functioning under the aegis of Ministry of Tourism & Culture, Government of India to the authors of the most outstanding publications published during the preceding three years and the same comprises of a citation and a cash prize of Rs.1 Lakh. While submitting that the action of returning such prestigious

awards has had the effect of tarnishing India's image outside the country, it is contended that it is essential for the Respondent No.1/Union of India to formulate guidelines in order to ensure that if any awardee in the future is inclined to return the Sahitya Academi Award owing to dissatisfaction against the Government, he or she should be made to forego portion of the royalties or other earnings which might have accrued to him/her after the award was given. It is also sought to be contended that since the Sahitya Academi Award is a national honour, the sanctity of the same needs to be protected in the same manner as the sanctity of National symbols including the National flag and National emblem of our country is protected.

3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondents, while explaining in detail the establishment of Sahitya Academi and its functions, it is pleaded that Sahitya Academi stands for freedom of expression of all writers irrespective of caste, colour, creed or nationality. With regard to the factum of some of the awardees returning the award, it is stated that the Executive Board of the Sahitya Academi took cognizance of the said issue in its 187th Meeting held on 17.12.2015 and passed the following resolution:

"The Executive Board of the Sahitya Academi at its meeting, held on 17th December, 2015 noted with grief the messages from the Hon'ble fellow writers. The sentiments of those who differ are fully understood and appreciated.

However, the Executive Board wished to point out that each of the Academi's Award is decided carefully by a process involving people ranging from the common reader to the most eminent critic in the language and also the Academi's Constitution does not provide for taking back any award once given.

The Executive Board, therefore, hoped that all momentary differences notwithstanding, all writers of the country would be able to work together to further realize the spirit of the founding fathers of the Academi."

4. It is pleaded that in the light of the decision that has already been taken by Sahitya Academi which is reflected in the resolutions passed by the Executive Board on 17.12.2015 which are in consonance with the tradition and legacy of the Sahitya Academi, there is no need to formulate any guidelines as sought by the petitioners.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and having taken into consideration the specific plea of the Respondents in the counter affidavit that Sahitya Academi's Constitution does not provide for taking back any award once given, we are of the view that the issue sought to be raised by the petitioners deserves no further consideration by this Court and it is not a matter for issuing a mandamus to the Respondents to frame guidelines as sought by the petitioners.

6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

CHIEF JUSTICE

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL MARCH 27, 2017 pk