Partly allowed

M/S Academy Newspapers Pvt. Ltd., v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Mar 2026WP/31665/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A newspaper publisher alleged denial and discriminatory withholding of government advertisements by the Department of Information and Public Relations despite its eligibility. The State agreed to consider the representation; the Court directed the competent authority to dispose of the representation per the advertisement policy within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Second respondent directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 13.09.2024 per applicable advertisement policy with a reasoned order within four weeks.

M/S Academy Newspapers Pvt. Ltd., Vs State… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:16141 WP No. 31665 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 31665 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S. ACADEMY NEWSPAPERS PVT LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING OFFICE AT: 15-C, INDUSTRIAL 'A' LAYOUT BANNIMANTAP, MYSURU - 570 015,

¶9

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY M. GOVINDE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O MOODALAGIRI GOWDA, NO.647, 3^RD CROSS VIJAYA NAGAR POST, MANCHEGOWDANA KOPPALU, MYSURU - 570 017.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. AKSHAY RAMACHANDRA HUDDAR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT JOF INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS

¶15

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC:16141 WP No. 31665 of 2025

HC-KAR

VIKASA SOUDHA,

BENGALURU - 560 001.

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS NO. 17, "VARTHASOUDHA" INFANTRY ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶21

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS, VARTHABAHAVAN, DHANVANTHARI ROAD MYSURU - 570 001.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER AND ALLOT GOVERNMENT ADVERTISEMENTS TO THE PETITIONERS NEWSPAPERS, NAMELY STAR OF MYSORE AND MYSORE MITRA, IN A FAIR, NON-DISCRIMINATORY, AND TRANSPARENT MANNER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.,

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:16141 WP No. 31665 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

¶32

"a. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the Respondent No.2 to consider and allot Government advertisements to the Petitioner's newspapers, namely "Star of Mysore" and "Mysore Mitra", in fair, non-discriminatory, and transparent manner in accordance with law;

¶33

b. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper, and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case."

¶34

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents–State. This Court has carefully perused the pleadings, documents, and material placed on record.

¶35

The petitioner has placed on record a detailed representation dated 13.09.2024, produced as Annexure– C, wherein the petitioner has specifically addressed its grievance with regard to the alleged denial of government advertisements by the Department of Information and

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:16141 WP No. 31665 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Public Relations (DIPR). The representation discloses that the petitioner has asserted its eligibility by placing reliance on its circulation, registration with the Registrar of Newspapers for India, and its classification as a State-level newspaper by the competent authority. The petitioner has further contended in the said representation that similarly situated newspapers have been extended the benefit of government advertisements, whereas the petitioner has been singled out for differential treatment, thereby alleging arbitrariness.

¶39

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate, on instructions, submits that the release of government advertisements is governed strictly by the policy framework formulated by the State Government, and that the same is implemented uniformly by the competent authority. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s representation, as at Annexure–C, shall be duly considered by the concerned authority in accordance with the applicable policy guidelines. She would, however,

¶40

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:16141 WP No. 31665 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

seek reasonable time for such consideration and for passing appropriate orders thereon.

¶43

Having regard to the nature of the grievance ventilated by the petitioner and in light of the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate that

¶44

the petitioner’s representation would be considered in accordance with law and the governing policy, this Court is of the view that no further adjudication on merits is warranted at this stage. Interest of justice would be subserved if a direction is issued to the competent authority to consider the petitioner’s representation within a time-bound framework.

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i. The writ petition is hereby allowed in part ;

¶47

ii. The second respondent is directed to consider

¶48

and dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 13.09.2024, produced at Annexure–C, strictly in accordance with the applicable

¶49

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:16141 WP No. 31665 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

advertisement policy/guidelines of the State Government, and in an objective and nondiscriminatory manner;

¶52

iii. While undertaking such consideration, the competent authority shall also examine the petitioner’s contention regarding alleged differential treatment vis-à-vis similarly placed newspapers, and shall pass a reasoned and speaking order;

¶53

iv. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶54

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶55

HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

M/S Academy Newspapers Pvt. Ltd., v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Academy Newspapers Pvt. Ltd., v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fellowship of Udupi District Churches Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Dayanand Madhu Shetty Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Yadehalli Sports Club Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Nagaraj Vs State of Karnataka

Ravindra Kumar B Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjunath N Vs State of Karnataka