Judgment :- 1. The petitioners in the above writ petitions claim that they are publishing the newspaper in the book form and they are entitled for renewal of registration under Sec.9 of the Post Office Act 1898, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ . In all these cases, the petitioners have already registered their Newspaper/periodicals under the said provision. In most of the cases, the registration had been renewed for more than 20 Years, and for the first time, the impugned orders came to be passed rejecting the p etitioners request for renewal. 2. The impugned orders are passed rejecting the petitioners request for renewal for the year 2000, mainly on the basis of the letter dated 19.8.1998 sent by the Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts. In the said communication sent to all Regional Postmasters-General, it is stated that when the registration to be renewed are too be granted regionally, it may be open to the Postmaster-General to come to the conclusion that the magazine cannot be regarded as a newspaper for the purpose of Section 9 of the said Act. Further guidelines are given for the Postmaster-General concerned to deal with the publication for the purpose of Sec.9 of the said Act. 3. So, to decide the issue in question, it is beneficial to look into the scope of Section 9 of the said Act, and rule 30 of the Indian Post Office Rules. 4. The Central Government is empowered to make Rules providing for registration newspaper for transmission by inland post as registered newspapers under section 9 of the Post Office Act, 1898 which reads as follows:- 9. Power to make rules as to registered newspaper:- (1) The Central Government may make rules providing for the registration of newspapers for transmission by inland post as registered newspapers. Power to make rules as to registered newspaper:- (1) The Central Government may make rules providing for the registration of newspapers for transmission by inland post as registered newspapers. (2) For the purpose of such registered, every publication, consisting wholly of in great part of political or other news or of articles relating there to current topics, with or without advertisements, shall be deemed a news-paper, subject to the following conditions, namely:- (a) that it is published in numbers at intervals of not more thirty-one days; and (b) that it has a bona fide list of subscribers; (3) An extra or supplement to a newspaper, bearing the same date as the newspaper and transmitted therewith, shall be deemed to be part of the newspaper; Provided that no such extra or supplement shall be so deemed unless it consists wholly or in great part of matter like that of the newspaper and has the title and date of publication of the newspaper printed at the top of each page Explanation:- Nothing in this section or in the rules thereunder shall be construed to render it compulsory to send newspapers by the inland post.” 5. Newspaper is not define under the said Act or Rule Only on the basis of Section 9 of the Act we have to understand the scope of word “newspaper.” Rule 30 of the Indian Post Office Rules also deals with registered newspaper. The relevant Rule of the purpose of the present cases is Rule 30(3) to (5), which is as follows:- “30 (3). A registration shall remain in force till 31st December of the calendar year following that in which it was effected. Every subsequent renewal of a registration shall remain in force for one calendar year. Application for renewal of registration shall be made so as to reach the officer concerned at least one month before the date of expiry of the previous registration and shall be accompanied by two copies of the latest issue of the newspaper. A late fee of Rs.5 shall be charged for each application for renewal received later than the last working day of the calendar month preceding the last month of the period of previous registration. A late fee of Rs.5 shall be charged for each application for renewal received later than the last working day of the calendar month preceding the last month of the period of previous registration. Renewal in all cases shall be granted only when the Postmaster-Genera l or other officer referred to in the sub-rule (1) is satisfied that the provisions of sub- sections (2) of section 9 of the Act are fulfilled. In case the previous registration expires before registration is renewed, the paper shall be prepaid at book packed rates pending issue of the renewal. ‘In case the application for renewal is received after the date of expiry of the previous registration, it shall be treated as a fresh application.’ (4) Nothing in this rule shall be deemed to prevent newspapers from being transmitted by post, either singly or otherwise of the rates and under the conditions prescribed for book packers, or for book packets containing periodicals, and if a newspaper sought to be transmitted by post as a registered newspaper fails to comply with any of the conditions specified in sub-rule(1), it shall be transmitted by post at the said rates and under the said conditions. (5) The Postmaster-General or officer exercising the powers of the Postmaster-General of the Postal circle ‘in which the newspaper is published or, as the case may be, posted or sought to be posted’ may cancel or refuse the registration of a newspaper (i) when he is satisfied that the provisions of sub-section(2) of Section 9 of the Act do not continue to be fulfilled; or (ii) as soon as the certificate or the recommendation mentioned in item(i) of sub-rule(2), respectively, is formally cancelled or withdrawn by the authorities concerned.” In these cases, there is no dispute that the petitioners have made application for renewal on the basis of the above said provisions. It is the case of the petitioners that all these periodicals have been registered under the Newsprint Act. The question therefore to be considered is whether the petitioners have complied with the requirement under Section 9(2) of the Act. 6. The first part of Section 9 of the Act deals with definition ‘newspaper’ for the purpose of registration. The second part lays down the conditions. The question therefore to be considered is whether the petitioners have complied with the requirement under Section 9(2) of the Act. 6. The first part of Section 9 of the Act deals with definition ‘newspaper’ for the purpose of registration. The second part lays down the conditions. So, under the said provision a legal fiction has been introduced with respect to “newspaper” for the purpose of registration and it gives meaning wider than its literary meaning. It is also therefore clear that the conditions specified in sub-section (2) of section 9 should also be complied with for the purpose of registration under section 9 of the said Act. To claim as a newspaper, it should contain “wholly or in great part of political or other new, or of articles relating thereto or to other current topics, with or without advertisements.” As stated above, it is not possible to give any exhaustive meaning of the words “articles relating to political or other news or to other current topics” and the definition of a newspaper as mentioned under Section 9 of the Act is obviously larger in its import than the dictionary meaning of the word ‘newspaper’. But it is not possible to give full scope of the word ‘newspaper’ as defined under the said provision. The other news’ as stipulated in Section 9(2) of the said Act need not be construed as of a general one. It may be a news of the public regarding religion or any other particulars useful to the readers. Even the word ‘great part’ does not necessarily mean the greater part and if the substantial part contains articles relating to the political or other news or current topics, it will be regarded as a news paper within the said provision. 7. The periodicals which the petitioners are claiming as newspaper under Section 9(2) of the said Act contains ‘news’ relating to religion, medicine or with respect to payment of pension etc., The said informations either in the form of articles or otherwise have to be construed as they will come under Section 9(2) of the said Act. Merely because they relate to religion alone, or education alone or medicine alone, it cannot be said that they are not the news as contemplated under Section 9(2) of the said Act. 8. Merely because they relate to religion alone, or education alone or medicine alone, it cannot be said that they are not the news as contemplated under Section 9(2) of the said Act. 8. Even the Apex Court has dealt with the scope of expression “news” and “newspaper” in All India Reporter Karmachari Sangh v. A.I.R. Ltd., A.I.R. 1988 S.C. 1325. Their Lordships have held as follows:- “The expression “news” is not defined in the Act. Several definitions of the expression “news” collected from the different dictionaries and digests have been cited before us. It is enough if we refer to the meaning of the word “news” given in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary for the purpose of this case. It says that “news” means tidings, new information of recent events; new occurrences as a subject of report of talk.” From a reading of the said decision it is clear that the news published need not be a public news. 9. While considering the scope of Section 9(2) of the said Act, the learned Judge of the Allahabad High Court in the decision in Mitraprakashan Ltd. v. Post Master General, U.P., Allahabad, A.I.R. 1957 All. 662, has held as follows:- “11.Section 9, sub-section (2), which I have already quoted in its first part defines what will be deemed to be a newspaper for the purposes of registration. Sub-section (2) uses the words “deemed a newspaper” which necessarily implies that a legal fiction has been introduced and the word “newspaper” for the purposes of registration has been given a meaning wider than its literary meaning. It further provides that: for the purpose of such registration, every publication...... shall be deemed a newspaper, subject to the following conditions, namely: (a) that it is published in numbers at intervals of not more than thirty-one days; and (b) that it has a bona fide list of subscribers’ (12) From a reading of Rule 30(5) along with S.9 it is clear that the conditions specified in sub-section (2) of S.9 referred to in that rule only mean the conditions, namely: (a) that it is published in numbers at intervals of not more than thirty-one days; and (b) that it has a bona fide list of subscribers. If any of these two conditions cease to continue to be fulfilled the registration may be cancelled. If any of these two conditions cease to continue to be fulfilled the registration may be cancelled. But the fact that the publication should consist “wholly or in great part of political or other news, or of articles or other news, or of articles relating thereto, or to other current topics, with or without advertisements”, cannot be regarded as a condition specified in S.9, sub-section (2). It is therefore clear that even if it be held that from the examination of the periodical it appears to the Postmaster-General now that it does not consist “wholly or in great part or political or other news, or of articles relating thereto, or to other current topics with or without advertisements”, he cannot refuse the registration of a newspaper in the exercise of his powers under R.30, sub-section (5). It is also plain that the Postmaster-General may have to enter into an enquiry as regards the regards of the contents of the periodical, when the first registration is granted or when the r enewal application is made after the enquiry of the period of the first registration. But there is no such power to the Postmaster-General when the application for renewal has been made within time under Rule 30, sub-rule (3), with the note. In this view of the matter it was not open to the Postmaster-General to refuse registration to the petitioner. As I have said it is inconceivable that a power should be given to successive Post-masters-General to take different view regarding the contents of a periodical every time when the period of registration is about to expire. 10. According to the learned Judge, first part of Section 9(2) of the Act cannot be construed as a condition for registration of the newspaper, and only the second part has to be taken as a condition. It is also held that no power is given to the Postmaster-General to cancel the registration given after holding an enquiry with respect to the nature of contents of periodicals. 11. The learned Judge also has relied on the decision in (1946) 327 U.S. 146. It is also held that no power is given to the Postmaster-General to cancel the registration given after holding an enquiry with respect to the nature of contents of periodicals. 11. The learned Judge also has relied on the decision in (1946) 327 U.S. 146. In the said decision, the Postmaster-General has revoked permit on the ground that it does not conform to condition, and it has been held as follows:- “Congress did not intend by the Fourth condition of S.14 of the Postal Constitution Act of 1879 to give the Postmaster General the power to classify publications on the basis of the quality of their content. If the Postmaster General’s order is sustained he becomes established as a censor with ‘vague and absolute authority’ over the moral and literary value of newspapers and periodicals’. It was observed by Justice Douglas who delivered the opinion of the Court as follows:- But requirement that literature or art conform to some form prescribed by an official smacks of an ideology foreign to our system. The basic values implicit in the requirements of the fourth condition can be served only by uncensored distribution of literature. From the multitude of competing offerings the public will pick and choose. What seems to one to be trash may have for others fleeting or even enduring values. But to withdraw the second class rate from this publication to-day because its contents seemed to one official not good for the public would sanction withdrawal of the second-class rate tomorrow from another periodical whose social economic views seemed harmful to another official. The validity of the obscenity laws is recognition that the mails may not be used to satisfy all tastes, no matter how perverted. But Congress has left the Postmaster-General with no power to prescribe standards for the literature or the art which a mailable periodical disseminates.” According to the learned Judge there is no power for the Postmaster-General to refuse renewal of registration on the ground that the contents of the magazine does not fulfil the requirements of S.9(2) of the said Act, especially when he satisfied about the requirement when the same issue was registered under Section 9 of the Act. 12. 12. Even in the present writ petitions only after verifying the periodicals published by the petitioners, the concerned authorities have registered the same under the Post Office Act, after satisfying with the compliances of the requirements under Section 9 of the Act. The fact that they have been registered shows that the petitioners have fulfilled the conditions specified under Section 9 of the Act. Even now, it is not the case of the respondents that the periodicals published by the petitioners are different from the periodicals produced before the concerned authorities for the purpose of registration. In the absence of such a plea, the respondents cannot take a different view for the purpose of renewal of the same, though the renewal has to be construed as fresh permission. When it is not the case of the respondents that there is a change in the character of the periodicals published by the petitioners, the authorities cannot change their views on the same set of facts and come to different conclusio n, though the registration of publication as newspaper including renewal may depend upon the discretion of the Post-master General with reference to the conditions mentioned under Section 9 of the Act. “But, it cannot be left to the sweet will of every Post-Master General to form a different opinion about a particular publication. 13. In these writ petitions, the impugned orders have been passed only pursuant to the letter sent by the Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts, dated 19.8.1998 giving certain guidelines to the Post-masters General to deal with the registration. Under Section 9 of the Act, there is no provision to give such guidelines for taking the decision. 14. While dealing with similar issue, the Apex Court in the decision in Sanjeev Coke Mfg. Co. v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., A.I.R. 1983 S.C. 239, has held as follows:- “But, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves with the hollowness or the self-condemnatory nature of the statements made in the affidavits filed by the respondents to justify and sustain the legislation. The deponents of the affidavits filed into Court may speak for the parties on whose behalf they swear to the statements. They do not speak for the Parliament. No one may speak for the Parliament and Parliament is never before the Court. The deponents of the affidavits filed into Court may speak for the parties on whose behalf they swear to the statements. They do not speak for the Parliament. No one may speak for the Parliament and Parliament is never before the Court. After Parliament has said what it intends to say, only the Court may say what Parliament meant to say. None else. Once a statute leaves Parliament house, the Court’s is the only authentic voice which may echo (interpret) the Parliament. This the Court will do with reference to the language of the statute and other permissible aids. The executive Government may place before the Court their understanding of what Parliament has said or intended to say or what they think was Parliament’s object and all the facts and circumstances which in their view led to the legislation. When they do so, they do not speak for Parliament. No act of Parliament may be struck down because of the understanding of misunderstanding of Parliamentary intention by the executive Government or because their (the Government’s) spokesmen do not bring out relevant circumstances but indulge in empty and self-defeating affidavits. They do not and cannot bind Parliament. Validity of legislature is not to be judged by merely affidavits filed on behalf of the State, but by all relevant circumstances which the Court may ultimately find and more especially by what may be gathered from what the legislature has itself said. We have mentioned the facts as found by us and we do not think that there has been any infringement of the right guaranteed by Art. 14.” 15. There cannot be any dispute that the concerned authority while dealing with renewal application should discharge the statutory functions as contemplated under the Act and the Rules, and the Government cannot issue any executive instructions under the guise of giving guidelines. This view of mine is supported by the decision of the Division Bench in The Association of Managements of Private Colleges, Etc. & others v. The State of Tamil Nadu, etc. & others, 1997 W.L.R. 647. In the said decision, the Government of Tamil Nadu have issued certain directions in G.O.Ms.No.245, Higher Education Department, dated 7.5.1997. While considering the said Government Order, the Division Bench has held as follows:- “52. & others v. The State of Tamil Nadu, etc. & others, 1997 W.L.R. 647. In the said decision, the Government of Tamil Nadu have issued certain directions in G.O.Ms.No.245, Higher Education Department, dated 7.5.1997. While considering the said Government Order, the Division Bench has held as follows:- “52. Having regard to the fact that the field is already occupied relating to admission of students in the private unaided self-financing colleges, the impugned Government Order issued invoking Executive power under Article 162 of the Constitution cannot be sustained. 53. The impugned order does not give the background, reasons or the necessity for issuing it. It also does not disclose the source of power. Neither the Act nor the Rules authorized or enabled the Government to issue the impugned order. The Government appear to have relied on Unnikrishnan’s Case. In the impugned order the Government direct that 50% of seats in the unaided Arts and Science colleges shall be allowed as Government quota as in the case of self-financing engineering colleges, and the seats allotted shall be filled up by the Director of Collegiate Education or any other person/committee authorized by him from the academic year 1997-98 by following the procedure prescribed in the annexure to the said order.” In the present writ petitions, since the concerned officers have passed the impugned orders only on the basis of the said circular sent by the Government, the impugned orders cannot be sustained in law. 16. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.6253 of 2000 has referred to the Circular of the Government of India, dated 12.4.99. In the said notification, to assist the Post-master General/Regional Post-master General in deciding the issue regarding the legislature under Section 9 of the Act and Rule 30 of the Rules, the Government has appointed a committee consisting of Regional DPS/DPS Headquarters Internal Finance Advisor and Assistant Director (Technical), and it is stated that based on the recommendation of the committee, the licence will be issued by the Regional/Circle office. As rightly submitted by the learned Additional Solicitor General, the Committee is only to assist the Regional Post-master General /Chief Post-master General. So, it cannot be said that the impugned orders cannot be sustained, which have been passed without consulting the committee. 17. As rightly submitted by the learned Additional Solicitor General, the Committee is only to assist the Regional Post-master General /Chief Post-master General. So, it cannot be said that the impugned orders cannot be sustained, which have been passed without consulting the committee. 17. If the petitioners have compiled with the conditions stipulated under Section 9 of the Act, they are entitled, as a matter of right, to register their periodicals under the Act. Though arguments were made to the effect that such registration is only for getting concession, I am not dealing with the same, since that is not the issue here. When the petitioners were able to satisfy the respondents and got their periodicals registered by complying with the conditions stipulated under the Act, on the same set of facts, renewal for the same should not have been rejected by the concerned authorities, as if the petitioners have not complied with the conditions, that too, without even giving opportunity to the petitioners. The periodicals published by the petitioners are being published for the past 37 years. It is not the case of the petitioners that the character of the periodicals has been changed. Even if such changes are reasons to register to renew, the same have to be done after giving an opportunity to the concerned parties. 18. In W.P.No.12578 and 12579 of 2000, Mr.Sriram Panchu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the alleged defects mentioned in the impugned orders had been complied with, and regarding violation, no details have been mentioned in the impugned order. So, while exercising statutory powers, the authorities should not be allowed to exercise the same arbitrarily, as they have no discretion to do so, if the petitioners are able to establish that they have complied with the conditions mentioned under Section 9 of the Act. 19. With reference to W.P.No.8164 of 2000, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that in view of the decision in All India Reporter Karmachari Sangh v. A.I.R. Ltd., A.I.R. 1988 S.C.1325, the law journal has to be construed only as a newspaper, and only after accepting the same, the journal was registered. According to him, the petitioner has not changed the character of the journal. In the said decision, the Apex Court has said as follows:- “11. According to him, the petitioner has not changed the character of the journal. In the said decision, the Apex Court has said as follows:- “11. the expression “news” is not defined in the Act Several definitions of the expression “news” collected from the different dictionaries and digests have been cited before us. It is enough if we refer to the meaning of the word “news” given in Shorter Oxford English Dictionary for the purposes of this cases. It says that “news” means tidings, new information of recent events; new occurrences as a subject of report or talk. The law reports which are being published by the 1st respondent are reports of recent decisions of the Supreme Court of India and of the High Courts in India which are supplied to it by its agents appointed at New Delhi and other places where High Courts are situated. It cannot be disputed that these decisions are of public importance. Article 141 of the Constitution provides that the law declared by Supreme Court shall be binding on all Courts within the territory of India. Even apart from Article 141 of the Constitution the decisions of the Supreme Court, which is a Court of record, constitute a source of law as they are the judicial precedents of the highest court of the land. They are binding on all the Courts throughout India. Similarly the decisions of every High Court being judicial precedents are binding on all Courts situated in the territory over which the High Court exercises jurisdiction. Those decisions also carry persuasive value before Courts which are not situated within its territory. The decisions of the Supreme Court and of High Courts are almost as important as statutes, rules and regulations passed by the competent legislatures and other bodies since they affect the public generally. It is well known that the decisions of the superior Courts while they settle the disputes between the parties to the proceedings in which they are given are the sources of law in so far as all others are concerned. As soon as a decision is rendered the members of the public would be interested in knowing it. At any rate lawyers and others connected with Courts and judicial proceedings who constitute a substantial section of the public are interested in knowing the contents and the effect of the decisions. As soon as a decision is rendered the members of the public would be interested in knowing it. At any rate lawyers and others connected with Courts and judicial proceedings who constitute a substantial section of the public are interested in knowing the contents and the effect of the decisions. The 1st respondent, All India Reporter Limited, and other publishers of law reports in the interests of their own business view with each other to publish the judgments of the Supreme Court or of the High Courts as early as possible in their law reports which are published periodically either weekly, fortnightly or monthly. They believe that faster the decisions are published in their reports, larger will be the number of subscribers. In fact we have a law report which is published from Delhi which publishes the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court within a day or two. The contents of these law reports constitute news in so far as the subscribers and the readers of these reports are concerned. It is by reading these law reports they come to know of the latest legal position prevailing in the country on any question decided in the decisions reported in the said reports. Hence it is difficult to agree with the submission made on behalf of the 1st respondent that the law reports do not carry any news and that the public is not interested in them. We are of the view that any decision published in the law reports of the 1st respondent contain information about the recent events which have been taken place in the Supreme Court or in the High Courts which are public bodies and these are matters in which the public is interested. We find it also difficult to agree with the submission made on behalf of the 1st respondent that since the law reports are going to be preserved by the lawyers as reference books after getting them rebound subsequently they should be treated as books. It may be that the decisions contained in these law reports may cease to be items of news after sometime but when they are received by the subscribers they do possess the character of works containing news. .......... ........... ........ 18. It is significant that the expression ‘newspaper’ as defined in the Act includes not merely ‘public news’ but also ‘comments of public news’. .......... ........... ........ 18. It is significant that the expression ‘newspaper’ as defined in the Act includes not merely ‘public news’ but also ‘comments of public news’. Every law report contains the editorial note at the commencement of the decisions printed therein and also comments on some of the recent decisions. Law reports also contain newly enacted Acts, Rules and Regulations, book reviews and advertisements relating to law books handwriting and finger print experts etc., speeches made at conferences in which the legal fraternity is interested etc. Though the publication of these items by itself may not occupy a substantial part of a law report to make it a newspaper, the publication of the recent judgments itself is sufficient to make a law report a newspaper which may after sometime cease to be a newspaper and become a book of reference.” From the abovesaid decision of the Apex Court, the respondents cannot come to the conclusion that the law journals published by the petitioner in the said case will not come under the scope of Section 9 of the Act. 20. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.8164 of 2000 has also submitted that with reference to the other law journals, namely. Law Weekly and Madras Law Journal, the respondents have not rejected the renewal. No valid reason is given to discriminate the petitioners’ journal alone and reject the renewal. Even with respect to the other petitioners, some of the petitioners have raised an issue that their periodicals alone have been discriminated and renewal has been rejected, th ough similar journals have got renewal on the basis that they have satisfied the requirements under Section 9 of the Act. 21. In view of the abovesaid facts, these writ petitions are allowed as prayed for. But, this will not prevent the respondents from dealing with the matter, if for any reason they come to such a conclusion that the character of the periodicals is changed and so they are not eligible to be registered under Section 9 of the Act, after giving an opportunity to the petitioners concerned, and the authorities can reject the renewal application. No costs. The connected W.M.PS. are closed.