High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 07 J&K CK 0006

Irfan Husain vs Prasar Bharti Broadcasting Corporation of India & ors

Jammu And Kashmir High Court · Decided on 12 July 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tashi Rabstan
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
567 of 2013

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 306 words
1.

Petitioner''s case is that in the year 2009, Director, Doordarshan Kendra, Srinagar, was required to telecast some programmes and accordingly,

petitioner was offered to arrange prominent singers for programme ""Shama Jalne Tak"". Petitioner states that after accepting the offer, he had to

arrange singers from Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi etcetera and petitioner was asked for recording of the same outside the Valley, which was done

by him. It is pleaded that petitioner was promised to be paid an amount of Rs.20,500/- per episode. Petitioner fulfilled the commitment and tapes

of the programme were handed over to Director, Doordarshan Kendera Srinagar in October, 2009 and the said tapes/ programmes produced

were pre-reviewed and after pre-reviewing the said programme, approval was granted by competent authority and as a consequence of which,

payment was to be released in his favour. Petitioner claims to have completed 105 episodes. However, only Rs.6.00 Lacs is said to have been

released and rest of the amount has not been released, forcing him to knock at portals of this Court with writ petition on hand.

2.

Learned counsel for petitioner states that petitioner would feel satisfied in the event writ petition is disposed of and respondents are directed to

consider the case of petitioner for release the due payment in his favour for 105 episodes. To this, learned counsel for respondents states that

petitioner''s case would be considered in strict accordance with rules governing the field.

3.

Writ petition, in view of grounds urged coupled with submissions made by learned counsel for parties, is disposed of with a direction to

respondents to consider the case of petitioner for release of payment, if any, due to him, in accordance with rules governing the field within a

period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon respondents. Disposed of.