The Calcutta High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) seeking permission to set up a stall at the Kolkata International Book Fair 2025. The VHP contended that, despite having been allotted a stall in previous years, their application for the current year was unjustly rejected by the Booksellers and Publishers Guild, the fair's organizing body. They argued that the state's significant involvement in organizing the fair meant that the denial infringed upon their fundamental rights.
Justice Amrita Sinha, presiding over the case, held that the Guild's refusal did not violate the VHP's rights to conduct business or their freedom of speech and expression. She emphasized that the Guild's decision did not prevent the VHP from publishing or distributing their materials through other channels. Justice Sinha stated, "It is not the case that if the petitioners are not allotted any stall in the fair, then their right to business or their freedom of speech or expression will be infringed in any manner."
The court further clarified that the Kolkata International Book Fair, despite its popularity and substantial state support, remains a private event organized by the Guild. Justice Sinha noted that the event's prominence does not transform it into a public event, nor does it render the Guild a 'State' or 'other authority' under Article 12 of the Constitution. She remarked, "The fair held by the Guild may be highly popular and may attract maximum footfall but only because an event has gained such amount of popularity the same cannot be termed as a public event and the authority organizing the said event cannot be treated as 'other authorities' under Article 12 of the Constitution."
This decision aligns with a previous ruling where the court dismissed a similar plea by the Association for Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR), which had also been denied a stall at the same book fair. In that instance, the court found the petition non-maintainable, reinforcing the principle that the Guild's decisions regarding stall allocations are not subject to judicial review under constitutional mandates.
The case, titled "Vishva Hindu Parishad, Dakshinbanga & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors." (WPA No. 1373 of 2025), underscores the judiciary's stance on the autonomy of private organizations in managing their events, even when such events receive substantial state support. The court's ruling delineates the boundaries between state actions and private organizational decisions, affirming that not all entities receiving state assistance fall under the definition of 'State' as per Article 12.
In conclusion, the Calcutta High Court's judgment reaffirms the independence of private bodies like the Booksellers and Publishers Guild in conducting their affairs without being subjected to constitutional scrutiny applicable to state actors. This decision highlights the importance of distinguishing between public functions and private organizational autonomy within the framework of constitutional law.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.