The decision of the Union Government to fix a minimum price for a newspaper was challenged by (A) Hitavada (B) The Tribune (C) Deccan Herald (D) Sakal Correct Ans: (D) Explanation The Union Government's attempt to regulate newspaper pricing faced strong opposition, particularly from Sakal. The publication challenged this decision, arguing that it restricted press freedom and interfered with business operations. Setting a minimum price limited affordability and circulation, which directly affected both readers and publishers. Moreover, the case highlighted a crucial debate about government intervention in media pricing. Supporters of regulation claimed that a price floor prevented unfair competition and ensured quality journalism. However, critics argued that it violated the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. The government’s control over pricing could set a dangerous precedent for further restrictions on the press. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sakal, emphasizing that such pricing regulations were unconstitutional. The judgment reinforced the principle that economic restrictions on newspapers could indirectly curtail freedom of expression. By limiting a newspaper’s ability to decide its price, the government was effectively controlling access to information. This ruling remains a landmark case in protecting media independence. In conclusion, Sakal’s challenge against the minimum price regulation reaffirmed the need to safeguard press freedom. Government interference in media pricing not only affects businesses but also restricts the free flow of information. Therefore, upholding journalistic independence is essential to maintaining a democratic society.