The Allahabad High Court cautioned that arbitrary administrative orders could undermine media independence, while hearing Amar Ujala’s plea over loss of government advertisements. The bench stressed such actions threaten press autonomy and the role of the Fourth Estate.
The Allahabad High Court recently warned that administrative orders issued in a high-handed fashion could erode media independence. This remark came from a bench of Justices Vivek Saran and Ajit Kumar during a petition by Amar Ujala Limited, publisher of the Amar Ujala newspaper.
The case centered on a October 15, 2025, directive from Sambhal’s District Magistrate (DM), which reportedly led to the newspaper losing out on government ads. The issue stemmed from Amar Ujala’s coverage of a conflict at a local Gurudwara.
The petitioner explained that the Divisional Commissioner had issued an order on September 16, 2025, following the story’s publication. The paper responded by printing a corrigendum on September 18, 2025, to correct the initial report.
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court: “Freedom of Press Cornerstone of a Democratic Society”
Yet, the DM proceeded with the contested order without reviewing this clarification, the newspaper claimed, calling the move biased and outside the administration’s purview.
In its March 25 ruling, the High Court emphasized protecting the media’s role as the fourth estate.
It stated,
“Any dictatorial order like the one that has been passed, would certainly be impeaching upon the autonomy of the Fourth (Estate),”
The court also pointed out that the original report’s controversy had faded, given the newspaper’s compliance with the Commissioner’s instructions via the September 18 clarification.
The judges noted,
“We find it to be quite a trivial issue now at this stage when the Commissioner’s directions contained in the order dated 16.9.2025 have got literally complied with in the publication of the News Daily edition of 18.9.2025,”
Also Read: Calcutta High Court Upholds Press Freedom | Grants Anticipatory Bail to Journalist
The bench added that officials unhappy with a publication should use proper legal channels. The state revealed that the DM had sent a notice to the publisher on December 17, 2025, seeking an explanation for the report.
Noting this, the High Court instructed the petitioner to submit a new application to the DM within two weeks, including a certified copy of the order. The DM was told to issue a reasoned decision within one week, factoring in the September 18 corrigendum. The petition was then disposed of.
Amar Ujala was represented by advocates Rakesh Pande, Sunil Kumar, and Hira Lal Yadav. Standing Counsel Mukul Tripathi appeared for the state.
Case Title: Amar Ujala Limited v State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE