New Delhi:The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea by an NGO which sought directions to the Centre to start a 24-hour Sindhi language channel on Doordarshan, saying that “no citizen can say that in pursuit of my fundamental right to set up a separate television channel…” and there may be other means to preserve the language.
The matter came before a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra. Senior advocate Indira Jaising represented the petitioner, NGO Sindhi Sangat.
The CJI told Jaising, “"Can a citizen under Article 29 say that there must be a mandate to start a separate channel to preserve my language? There are other means of preserving a language. Create more awareness….”. Jaising vehemently argued that the most important means to preserve anything is through public broadcasting.
“Not necessarily. Because that would depend on the profile of the community. If a community which is predominantly rural, public broadcasting would be a very important means. If the communities are urban, for instance, the Sindhis, I am not sure and I must not be misconstrued, are basically in the urban or semi-urban areas”, said the CJI.
Jaising replied they are a displaced community and where would a refugee community go? “They own no land to call their own”, said Jaising. However, the CJI, who was not convinced with Jaising’s argument, said: “Therefore, public broadcasting by having an earmarked channel is one means of preserving language and culture, there could be other means as well….”.
Jaising pressed that this is the solitary example of a language which does not have a state, and added, perhaps, the same with the Parsi language. Jaising said if there were to be a state called Sindh, then there would have been a channel.
The bench said that the petitioner before the high court did not challenge the Doordarshan’s policy and the prayer was only to start a separate channel. At this juncture, Jaising insisted that the court has the power to mould the relief and reiterated that public broadcasting is the most effective means of preserving a language. “No citizen can say that in pursuit of my fundamental right to set up a separate television channel. There may be other means of protecting the language”, said the CJI.
Jaising said the duty of the state is to respect, protect, and fulfil fundamental rights, and it can be done in multiple ways and she accepts that. “But you cannot deny that one of the ways of doing it is through public broadcasting. And, public broadcasting has a legitimacy, which a private broadcasting may not have…there is a duty cast on the state to protect, fulfil, and respect rights of linguistic minorities”, said Jaising.
However, the CJI said the bench has already made its point clear, and, after hearing detailed submissions, rejected NGO Sindhi Sangat's petition challenging an order of the Delhi High Court which dismissed a plea.
The NGO has moved the top court against the May 27 order of the high court which dismissed the plea, saying the decision of Prasar Bharati not to start a 24-hour Sindhi language channel is based on an intelligible differentia.
The high court, in its order, said the NGO has been unable to persuade it concerning the legal right or constitutional right to seek directions for allocating a 24-hour Sindhi channel on Doordarshan and its plea was "misplaced".
