Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI MONDAY, THE20H DAY OF JANUARY201430TH POUSHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 19295 of 2009 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED46YEARS, FILM DIRECTOR, THAZHATH MOOTHERI, P.O.GRAMAM-VELIYANCODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
2. RAVI CHALLISSERY, FILM PRODUCER, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S.SEVEN POWER FILMS, KOTTINGAL HOUSE, CHALLISSERY, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE CHALACHITHRA ACADEMY, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 010, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. GIREESH KASARAVALLY, CHAIRMAN OF AWARD COMMITTEE OF KERALA STATE FILM AWARDS FOR MALAYALAM FILMS 2008 RESIDING AT NO.176, 6TH CROSS, GANDHI NAGAR, BANGALURU. R1 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SAREENA GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON0411-2013, THE COURT ON2001-2014 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.19295/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION DATED272/2004 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, KERALA OF M/S. SEVEN POWER FILMS P2 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.CIL/1/48/2008-THI DATED89/2008 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION P3 COPY OF THE KERALA STATE AWARDS FOR MALAYALAM FILMS & WRITING ON CINEMA2008P4 COPY OF THE NEWS ITEMS APPEARED IN THE MALAYALAM DAILIES, MATHRUBHOOMI AND DESABHIMANI P5 COPY OF THE SYNOPSIS OF THE STORY OF THE FILM CHITHRASALABHANGALUDE VEEDU P6 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.SA. U. (ORD) 3675/2008/LSGD DATED1710/2008 P7 COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.N.E.P.3/69450/08 DATED410/2008 P8 COPY OF THE WRITE UPS APPEARED IN THE CINE-MAGAZINES REGARDING THE FILM OF THE PETITIONERS. P9 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED67/09 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A) COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED11/2008 PUBLISHED BY THE KSCA INVITING ENTRIES FOR SELECTION R1(B) COPY OF THE ORDER
DATED155/2009 OF THE2D RESPONDENT GOVERNMENT R1(C) A NOTE SHOWING CREDENTIALS OF THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE JUDGING COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE2D RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.19295 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2014 JUDGMENT
The first petitioner is the Director and the second petitioner is the producer of the children's film 'Chithrasalabhangalude Veedu'.
2. The first respondent Academy invited applications for receiving awards for the best movies released in the year 2008 with Regulations for Kerala State Awards for Malayalam Films & Writing on Cinema 2008 as per the notification dated 10.2.2009. In the regulation, it was stated that the objective of the awards is to encourage the production of Malayalam films of high aesthetic and technical standards and of social, educational and cultural values. Details of cash awards were also given in that regulation, according to which the producer would get a cash award of Rs.3 lakhs, a replica and a certificate for the best children's movie. The Director of such movies would get a cash award of WPC No.19295 of 2009 2 Rs.60,000/-, a replica and a certificate. In the case of best feature films, there was a cash award of Rs.2 lakhs along with the replica and the certificate to the producer and a cash award of Rs.1 lakh, a replica and a certificate to the Director.
3. It was also stated in clause-6 (11) of the regulations that no award should be given in a category for which the number of entries received was less than two except in the case of children's films. That means, even if only one children's film was received, the same would be considered for awards.
4. The petition filed was submitted for competition with all supporting documents and the same were accepted by jury members. The jury members who have screened the movies declared awards for best feature films, artists, technicians etc. However, the jury decided not to give award to the films under the children's category on the ground that none of the two films submitted for award were up to the required standard.
5. Therefore, the petitioners have come up before this Court for a declaration that the best children's film WPC No.19295 of 2009 3 award cannot be denied for a film on the sole ground of not reaching up to the standard even if there is only a single entry for the competition and also for a direction to the respondent to reconsider the decision taken not to give award to the children's film for the year 2008 in the light of the objectives detailed in Ext.P3 regulations in promoting and encouraging children's cinema.
6. In the counter filed by the first and second respondents, it is admitted that even if one film is received for evaluation for the award for best children's film, it has to be considered for the award. However, the respondents contend that the judging committee at its discretion decided not to recommend grant of any award for best children's films as according to the committee, both the entries for the award had not attained the required standard to be acclaimed by grant of award for the best children's film and therefore no award was granted to the best children's film in that year.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the first respondent and the learned Senior Government WPC No.19295 of 2009 4 Pleader.
8. The objective of the award as evident from Ext.P3 regulation is to encourage the production of Malayalam films of high aesthetic and technical standards and of social, educational and cultural values. Therefore, if any film contains such qualities has to be considered for giving awards. As per Ext.P3 regulation, even if only one film is in the category of children's film, it has to be considered for the award. This condition itself shows the importance of the need to encourage the production of the children's film. The importance given to the children's films is also evident from the highest amount of award declared to that categories. There is no specific regulation which says about the minimum standards for granting awards. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is the only total appreciation of the jury members. Each member may be having different views about the aesthetic and artistic values of a creative work. Therefore, it was argued that if no creation is having the above said qualities, the best among the entry should have to be adjudged as the best. WPC No.19295 of 2009 5 9. The learned counsel pointed out that the jury members having categorically observed that feature films submitted for awards were of not up to the expected standard. But, even then awards were given for best feature film, best producer, best technician etc. This fact is not denied by the respondents. However, only the entries among the category of children's film met with denial of awards for want of required standard. This, according to the petitioners, is highly discriminatory.
10. It appears that one of the intention of the Government in extending award for the producers of the children's movie is also to console their financial stress being taken for the creation of the movie and to encourage them to produce more children's movie. From Exts.P6 and P7 notification and circular, it is evident that the Government has realised the noble theme in the movie of the petitioners and therefore, they were exempted from the payment of entertainment tax. In Ext.P7 circular, the Education Department strongly recommended that every one in the school campus, teachers/students should not miss to see this WPC No.19295 of 2009 6 film.
11. The petitioners would allege that most of the people applauded very much in the creation and write- ups appeared in the cine magazines and periodicals is a good proof to substantiate that petitioner's film is of high morale and having a noble message to the upcoming youth with good aesthetic and artistic value. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances now placed before this Court, this Court is of the definite view that the matter requires a re-look by the respondents. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to constitute a special expert committee to reconsider the decision within a period of three months from today after evaluating the film "Chithrasalabhalangalude veedu". To facilitate speedy action, the petitioners shall be at liberty to produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the respondents within one month from today. sd/-A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE