Commercial speech protected under Constitution; Tata Press wins appeal on Yellow Pages publication

TATA PRESS LTD. Versus MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.

TATA PRESS LTD. Versus MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. - 1995 AIR 2438, 1995 (5) SCC 139, 1995 (5) JT 647 Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Tata Press Limited (Tatas) has the right to publish and circulate the 'Tata Press Yellow Pages' without violating the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, and the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951.
2. Whether 'commercial speech' is protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

Summary:

Issue 1: Right to Publish 'Tata Press Yellow Pages'
The Nigam and Union of India sought a declaration that only they have the right to print/publish the list of telephone subscribers and that Tata Press Limited (Tatas) has no right to print, publish, and circulate the 'Tata Press Yellow Pages' (Tata-pages). The trial court dismissed the suit, but the High Court's learned single judge allowed the appeal, holding that Rule 458 covered all parts of the telephone directory, including yellow pages. The Division Bench of the High Court upheld this judgment, concluding that the Tata-pages, despite some distinguishing features, essentially constituted a 'list of telephone subscribers.'

Issue 2: Commercial Speech and Article 19(1)(a)
The Supreme Court examined whether 'commercial speech' falls under the protection of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The Court referred to previous judgments, including Hamdard Dawakhana's case, which held that purely commercial advertisements do not fall within the concept of freedom of speech. However, the Court noted the evolution of the United States Supreme Court jurisprudence, which now recognizes the protection of 'commercial speech' under the First Amendment. The Court in Indian Express Newspapers' case also acknowledged that commercial advertisements cannot be denied protection under Article 19(1)(a) merely because they are issued by businessmen.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court held that 'commercial speech' is a part of the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The Court interpreted Rules 458 and 459 in light of this finding, concluding that the prohibition under Rule 458 is only in respect of publishing 'any list of telephone subscribers.' The Tata-pages, being a buyer's guide comprising paid advertisements, do not constitute a 'list of telephone subscribers' and thus do not fall under the prohibition of Rule 458. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court, and dismissed the suit filed by the respondents. The appellants were, however, restrained from publishing any entries similar to those in the 'white pages' of the telephone directory published by the Nigam.