Dismissed

Anandan v. the Union of India

Madras HC7 Aug 2025WP/24608/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A cameraman filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Director General of Doordarshan to decide his representation regarding the telecast of his documentary film Buddha and Dhamma. The court directed the authority to respond within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to deal with the petitioner's representation on the Buddha and Dhamma project and convey the decision within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this ord

Anandan Vs the Union of India — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.08.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

Anandan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Union of India,

¶11

Rep.by the Secretary to Government, The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting,

¶12

Sastri Bhavan, Dr.R.P.Road,

¶13

New Delhi-110 001.

¶14

2.The Director General (Doordarshan), Prasar Bharati, Broadcasting Corporation of India, Doordarshan Bhavan, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi-110 001.

¶15

3.The Additional Director General (Content-SZ), Office of the Doordarshan Kendra Bangalore, JC Nagar, Mosque Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka-560 006.

¶16

4.Deputy Director General (Head of Office), Doordarshan Kendra Chennai, Swamy Sivananda Salai, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶17

Page 1 of 7

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶20

5.Head of Programmes, Doordarshan Kendra, Chennai, Swamy Sivananda Salai, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. ... Respondents

¶21

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider the representation dated 12.11.2024 in accordance with law by taking steps to telecast Buddha and Dhamma project through Doordarsan as in-house production to secure the ends of justice.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sankarasubbu For Respondents : Mr.B.Rabu Manohar Senior Central Government Standing Counsel

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of writ of

¶25

Mandamus directing the second respondent to deal with the representation made by the petitioner on 12.11.2024, wherein, the petitioner is seeking for telecast of Buddha and Dhamma Project through Doordarshan.

¶26

_________ Page 2 of 7

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶29

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶30

The case of the petitioner is that he is working as Cameraman Grade-II, Doordarshan Kendra at Chennai. The petitioner came up with a new documentary film called Buddha and Dhamma. The proposal was submitted on 28.11.2023 containing 52 episodes and also the budget for production of serial. The effort taken by the petitioner was appreciated and after several deliberations, the petitioner was directed to reduce the number of episodes to 13. The petitioner stated that the episodes cannot be reduced so drastically. The petitioner was asked to go before the OTT Platform in this regard. The petitioner wanted the serial to be telecasted through Doordarshan, since it will have an All India Reach. In view of the same, the petitioner submitted a representation on 12.11.2024 to the second respondent. This representation was returned by stating that the proposal is

¶31

_________ Page 3 of 7

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶34

under consideration, on 27.11.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner was waiting for the programme to be produced and telecasted. Since there was no development thereafter, the present writ petition was filed before this Court.

¶35

This Court directed the learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents to take instructions. Accordingly, the learned counsel submitted the written instructions received from the Senior Administrative Officer, Doordarshan Kendra, Chennai. It is stated that the Competent Authority will have to decide on the request made by the petitioner and that is the reason why, the file was returned to the petitioner.

¶36

The petitioner was not aggrieved by the fact that the file was returned since the petitioner was informed that the project is under consideration. The petitioner, having taken so much of effort to complete the documentary film of Buddha and Dhamma, must be given a fair chance to enable the same to be broadcasted through Doordarshan, which will have

¶37

_________ Page 4 of 7

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶40

an All India Reach.

¶41

In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to deal with the representation made by the petitioner on 12.11.2024 and convey the decision to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶42

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no

¶43

order as to costs.

¶44

07.08.2025

¶45

NCC: Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No

¶46

ssb

¶47

_________ Page 5 of 7

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶50

¶51

The Union of India, Rep.by the Secretary to Government, The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Sastri Bhavan, Dr.R.P.Road, New Delhi-110 001.

¶52

2.The Director General (Doordarshan), Prasar Bharati, Broadcasting Corporation of India, Doordarshan Bhavan, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi-110 001.

¶53

3.The Additional Director General (Content-SZ), Office of the Doordarshan Kendra Bangalore, JC Nagar, Mosque Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka-560 006.

¶54

4.Deputy Director General (Head of Office), Doordarshan Kedra Chennai, Swamy Sivananda Salai, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶55

5.Head of Programmes, Doordarshan Kendra, Chennai, Swamy Sivananda Salai, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶56

Page 6 of 7

¶57

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶58

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶59

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶60

ssb

¶61

W.P.No.24608 of 2025

¶62

07.08.2025

¶63

_________ Page 7 of 7

¶64

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Anandan v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anandan v. the Union of India

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

P.Lakshmi Vs the District Collector

Rajamannar, Vs R.Murugan

Sridhanya Vs the Branch Manager

N.Manikandan Vs State by Tamil Nadu

M/S.Sakkthi Engraving Works Vs the Director General of Police

R.Murugesh Vs Office of the Director General