ITV

Category: High Court

  • Kerala High Court passes interim order on the placement and LCN clause of NTO 2.0

    Kerala High Court passes interim order on the placement and LCN clause of NTO 2.0

    MUMBAI: The Kerala High Court has passed an interim order on the placement and LCN clause in the case of The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)’s tariff order amendment. However, other provisions will be operational.

    All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF) members moved the Kerala High Court challenging certain provisions of TRAI’s amended tariff order and interconnection regulation earlier. While refusing to issue any interim order on any of the other provisions, the single judge asked AIDCF to file representation before TRAI pointing out objections to amendments. A proper consultative process from TRAI shall follow this step.  Till then impugned provisions except the provisions with regards to freezing of placement of channels in perpetuity shall be permitted to be operated.

    TRAI said in the amendment: 

    The channel number once assigned to a particular television channel shall not be altered by the distributor for a period of at least one year from the date of such assignment:

    Provided that this sub-regulation shall not apply in case the channel becomes unavailable on the distribution network:

    Provided further that if a broadcaster changes the genre of a channel then the channel number assigned to that particular television channel shall be changed to place such channel together with the channels of new genre in the electronic programme guide.

  • NTO 2.0: Ambiguity persists as arguments continue in Bombay, Kerala High Courts

    NTO 2.0: Ambiguity persists as arguments continue in Bombay, Kerala High Courts

    MUMBAI: Ambiguity continues in the ecosystem with just one day left for the implementation of new tariff order amendments (NTO 2.0).

    On Friday’s hearing in Bombay high Court, no conclusion was reached regarding interim relief. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) will continue its argument on Monday.

    According to sources close to the development, TRAI has been directed not to take any coercive step. Although there is no any conclusion yet, a decision will mostly be taken on Monday.

    Earlier, broadcasters’ argument was that the entire regime is set to kick in from 1 March. Since it is around the corner, they have moved the court seeking a stay. If they implement it before hearing, the entire petition becomes infructuous.

    In response to the argument, TRAI counsel said on Thursday that it’s not the entire amended interim regime that is kicking off from 1 March. The TRAI counsel added that broadcasters’ obligation to declare new prices became effective from 15 January, but they did not make any progress on it without any stay order. If they declare prices, then only other stakeholders in the industry will be able to comply with the regime, as TRAI noted.

    The Bombay High Court also asked TRAI to take instructions on deferment of NTO 2.0 as they did for the 2017 regime before the Madras High Court on Wednesday. After TRAI expressed its unwillingness to defer NTO 2.0, the hearing on interim stay started on Thursday.

    In another case, the Kerala High Court has passed an interim order directing the TRAI not to take steps that are detrimental to the interest of the All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF) members. Although on Friday’s hearing no judgement was passed for interim relief, the decision of interim protection has been reserved.

    In another development, Discovery has moved its petition to Delhi High Court which was heard today. The next hearing for the petition has been scheduled for 19 March.

  • Bombay High Court to hear TRAI’s plea in NTO 2.0 case tomorrow

    Bombay High Court to hear TRAI’s plea in NTO 2.0 case tomorrow

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court today heard the arguments of the broadcasters in their case against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) for the New Tariff Order   or NTO 2.0. The bench will hear pleas from the lawyers of TRAI tomorrow.

    In the previous hearing held yesterday, the court asked TRAI to take instructions on deferment of NTO 2.0 as they did for the 2017 regime before the Madras High Court.

    The petitioners are against the ‘impugned provisions’ from the new price regime which was implemented last year. At the beginning of 2020, the industry watchdog modified certain provisions (described as impugned provisions) of the new price regime which were implemented last year. TRAI prescribed twin conditions on pricing; the sum of the a-la-carte rates of the pay channels (MRP) forming part of a bouquet shall in no case exceed one-and-a-half times the rate of the bouquet of which such pay channels are a part.

    Recently, TRAI asked broadcasters and distribution platform operators (DPOs) to take necessary steps to ensure a smooth rollout of the amended new tariff order from 1 March. Both broadcasters and DPOs had been directed to publish the required information on their website to provide consumers sufficient time to exercise their choice of channels and bouquets before the implementation.

  • Bombay HC asks TRAI to take instructions on deferment of NTO 2.0

    Bombay HC asks TRAI to take instructions on deferment of NTO 2.0

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has asked the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to take instructions on deferment of (new tariff order) NTO 2.0 as they did for the 2017 regime before the Madras High Court. According to sources close to the development, the regulatory body has been asked to submit a deferment plan.

    TRAI has to respond at the next hearing scheduled on 27 February. As per the sources, today’s hearing went on for more than two hours and TRAI will continue its argument tomorrow. At first, broadcasters argued for the interim relief which was slightly opposed by TRAI.

    “The court asked why it can’t be deferred for one more month and within which the court can complete the hearing. If this can’t be deferred for one month, then court will decide on the interim relief tomorrow itself,” one of the sources said.  

    TRAI's counsels will take instructions from TRAI on the plan to defer NTO 2.0 just like they voluntarily deferred 2017 NTO before Madras HC.

    At the beginning of 2020, the industry watchdog modified certain provisions (described as impugned provisions) of the new price regime which was implemented last year. TRAI prescribed twin conditions on pricing.

    They were:

    1. The sum of the a-la-carte rates of the pay channels (MRP)forming part of a bouquet shall in no case exceed one and a half times the rate of the bouquet of which such pay channels are a part.

    2. The a-la-carte rates of each pay channel (MRP), forming part of a bouquet, shall in no case exceed three times the average rate of a pay channel of the bouquet of which such pay channel is a part.

    Recently, TRAI asked broadcasters and distribution platform operators (DPOs) to take necessary steps to ensure a smooth rollout of the amended new tariff order from 1 March. Both broadcasters and distribution platform operators (DPOs) had been directed to publish the required information on their website to provide consumers sufficient time to exercise their choice of channels and bouquets before the implementation.

  • Bombay HC to hear petitions against TRAI order

    Bombay HC to hear petitions against TRAI order

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court will hear on 26 February a petition filed by the Digital Cable Operators Association of Mumbai (DCOAM) and Maharashtra Cable Operations Foundation (MCOF), challenging the 'arbitrary' rules introduced by the TRAI.

    They challenged before the High Court the network capacity fee (NCF) implemented by TRAI under the NTO-2 regime. The operators’ main contention was with regard to the NCF cap of Rs 160/month fixed by TRAI and additional TV connections and discounts. The petitioners claimed that the NTO would hinder their basic right to do business.

    The court has set aside the matter for hearing for Wednesday.

    Adv Rahul Soman, who appeared for the operators, contended that the TRAI has not fixed an upper limit for extra channels. So, the situation is such that customers can demand any number of channels, which will hamper the cable operators’ business, argued the lawyer.

    A lot of stakeholders, in addition to some individuals, have moved various high courts in the country, challenging the TRAI’s new price regime. They include various broadcasters and bodies like the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF).

    Early this year, TRAI stipulated 200 channels for a NCF of Rs 160. The regulator has also directed the DPOs not to charge more than the stipulated monthly charge of Rs 160 for providing all the available channels.  

  • NTO 2.0: Bombay High Court adjourns case to 26 Feb

    NTO 2.0: Bombay High Court adjourns case to 26 Feb

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has adjourned the ongoing case between the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and broadcasters on the new tariff order (NTO) to 26 February. During the last hearing , no interim relief had been granted.

    Last time, the advocate for TRAI made a statement at the very beginning that the arguments should be based only on the petition and not on the rejoinder. Countering that, the advocate for Film & TV Producers Guild of India stated that there is nothing new in the rejoinder and everything is available in public domain.

    He also touched upon the point of the newly imposed twin conditions levied in the amendment of new tariff order where one condition is the cap of Rs 12 in a bouquet, the other being the discount on channel bouquets to around 33 per cent.

    Earlier, broadcasters were giving higher discounts pursuant to cross subsidies available by including smaller channels in its bouquets, which was totally in favour of consumers. He argued that if a consumer has to watch the so-called popular/niche channels (terms used by TRAI), he has to pay a higher price and it will increase his monthly bill.

    He also continued that although they do not come under the direct purview of TRAI, the amendments in the tariff order can affect their revenue. As the regulatory body has put a cap of Rs 12 on pay channel that can be included in a bouquet, the broadcaster cannot charge more than Rs 12 for that pay channel in a bouquet.

    The broadcaster has to pay huge amount to acquire content. Due to the regulations, if the broadcaster is not able to include it in a bouquet, it may prefer not to acquire such high priced content. Moreover, if broadcasters can not acquire quality content, the customer will lose.

    While broadcasters have the flexibility to decide the price of its pay channel and the customer should be able to view quality content on his TV, both these conditions are violated by the order.

    Last month, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) along with others has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the TRAI order. The petitioners mentioned that the as amendments which has been notified in “consumer interest," will have exactly the opposite effect, leading to crippling of the business of broadcasters and ultimate suffering of the consumer.

  • Gujarat High Court accepts plea against TRAI NTO 2.0 amendments

    Gujarat High Court accepts plea against TRAI NTO 2.0 amendments

    MUMBAI: The empire strikes back even as TRAI has been rubbishing news that NTO 2.0  is detrimental to the industry and will put the brakes on it. Despite repeated representations from different bodies, TRAI is sticking to its guns on imposing pricing regulations. Now the industry is fighting back.

    A spate of cases has been filled in different courts in a bid to turn TRAI and the government to its point of view. Earlier broadcasters have appealed at the Bombay and Madras High Courts and now they have filed a petition in the Gujarat High Court. Sources say that a few more petitions will be filed in different courts.

    The Gujarat High Court accepted a petition filed by broadcasters challenging the new tariff order for the broadcast sector by TRAI. Hearing the petition, Justice AY Kogje of the Ahmedabad bench of the Gujarat High Court issued notices to the Union of India and TRAI, asking them to file replies by 3 February, failing which the high court would grant interim relief to the petitioners.

    Petitioners named Somabhai Makwana, Nidhi Jani, Bharat Thakore, and Falguni Shah in their petition have stated that the tariff order issued by the regulatory body is beyond the powers under Section 11(2) of the TRAI Act and is conflicting with the provisions of Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995.

    On 1 January this year, TRAI had issued amendments to its tariff order for the broadcast sector, which received huge criticism from broadcasters and distribution operators alike.

    According to the petitioners, fixation of the network capacity fee (NCF) of Rs 130 per month per subscriber is not based on any intelligible material, and the criteria for determining the proposed amount lacks transparency.

    The case is ongoing in the Bombay High Court as well. In the previous hearing held on 14 January, the Bombay HC bench consisting of Justice SC Dharmadhikari and Justice RI Chagla had directed TRAI to file a reply in one week. They, in fact, had also refused to put a stay on the amendments pertaining to the new regulatory framework.

    Key amendments proposed by the broadcasters include the reduction of MRP cap to Rs 12, implementation of twin conditions on bouquet pricing, and other being the discount on channel bouquets to around 33 per cent.

    Earlier, Sun TV Network moved Madras High Court challenging the amendments to the new regulatory framework. The case  will be heard on 4 February. Hearing the matter, the division bench of Chief Justice Amreshwar Pratap Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad also issued notices to the Union of India and TRAI.

  • NTO 2.0 case: No interim relief granted, to be heard on 12 Feb

    NTO 2.0 case: No interim relief granted, to be heard on 12 Feb

    MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has listed the next hearing of the ongoing case between the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and broadcasters on the new tariff order (NTO) on 12 February. No interim relief has been granted yet which can be argued at the next hearing. It has also been directed to issue a notice to Maharashtra advocate general.

    During Thursday’s hearing, the advocate for TRAI made a statement at the very beginning that the arguments should be based only on the petition and not on the rejoinder. Countering that, the advocate for Film & TV Producers Guild of India stated that there is nothing new in the rejoinder and everything is available in public domain.

    He also touched upon the point of the newly imposed twin conditions levied in the amendment of new tariff order where one condition is the cap of Rs 12 in a bouquet, the other being the discount on channel bouquets to around 33 per cent.

    Earlier, broadcasters were giving higher discounts pursuant to cross subsidies available by including smaller channels in its bouquets, which was totally in favour of consumers. He argued that if a consumer has to watch the so-called popular/niche channels (terms used by TRAI), he has to pay a higher price and it will increase his monthly bill.

    He also continued that although they do not come under the direct purview of TRAI, the amendments in the tariff order can affect their revenue. As the regulatory body has put a cap of Rs 12 on pay channel that can be included in a bouquet,  the broadcaster cannot charge more than Rs 12 for that pay channel in a bouquet.

    The broadcaster has to pay huge amount to acquire content. Due to the regulations, if the broadcaster is not able to include it in a bouquet, it  may prefer not to acquire such high priced content. Moreover, if broadcasters can not acquire quality content, the customer will lose.

    While broadcasters have the flexibility to decide the price of its pay channel and the customer should be able to view quality content on his TV, both these conditions are violated by the order.

    Earlier in the month, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) along with others has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the TRAI order. The petitioners mentioned that the as amendments which has been notified in “consumer interest," will have exactly the opposite effect, leading to crippling of the business of broadcasters and ultimate suffering of the consumer.

  • IBF files writ petition against TRAI in Bombay High Court

    IBF files writ petition against TRAI in Bombay High Court

    MUMBAI: Amid the ongoing dispute in the broadcasting industry regarding amendments to the tariff order, the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), along with other broadcasters, has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).

    “The petition under article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India has been filed praying, for a writ, order or direction quashing the amendments carried out vide the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services interconnections (addressable systems) (second amendment) regulations, 2020 along with the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services standards of quality and consumer protection (addressable systems) (third amendment) regulations, 2020 along with the telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) services (eighth) (addressable systems) tariff (second amendment) order, 2020 issued by the respondent (TRAI) on 1 January,” the petition read.

    According to industry sources, the hearing of the case will come up tomorrow.

    In the beginning of this month, the industry regulator modified certain provisions (described as impunged provisions ) of the new price regime which was implemented last year. TRAI prescribed twin conditions on pricing –

    · The sum of the a-la-carte rates of the pay channels (MRP)forming part of a bouquet shall in no case exceed one and half times the rate of the bouquet of which such pay channels are a part

    · The a-la-carte rates of each pay channel (MRP),forming part of a bouquet, shall in no case exceed three times the average rate of a pay channel of the bouquet of which such pay channel is a part.

    The authority also decided that only channels with MRP of Rs 12 or less will be permitted to be part of the bouquet offered by the broadcasters.

    How the amendments can harm the broadcasters’ business as well as consumer interest :

     The petitioners have mentioned that the amendments which has been notified in “consumer interest” will have exactly the opposite effect, leading to crippling of the business of broadcasters and ultimate suffering to the consumer.

    It has also been mentioned that such crippling of the business would ultimately result either in closing down of the broadcasters’ channels or in diminishing the quality and the quantity of content available on TV channels to the consumer. In addition to that, the petitioners would lead in compelling the broadcasters to offer their channels only in a-la-carte format.

    Additionally, unlike under the 2017 Regulatory Regime, the new provisions prohibit broadcasters from giving any discount on the MRP of any bouquet to the DPO. Hence the broadcasters are of the view that they are completely dis-incentivised from creative bouquet offerings. They think that the new prohibition placed upon the broadcaster from offering a discount on bouquets will result in a huge reduction in DPOs’ demand for broadcaster-created bouquets, resulting, over a period of time, in discontinuation of bouquet offerings by broadcasters.

    The writ has been filed broadly to address the following issues:

    · A Broadcaster’s freedom of pricing its own content has been taken away/ interfered with by the Respondent, as it continues to place fetters and unrealistic caps on the manner of offering the channels and pricing thereof.

    · Despite admission by Respondent that offering of channels through bouquets is the preferred and prevalent practice, even from a subscriber’s viewpoint, the Impugned Provisions have the effect of dismantling and making unworkable any bouquet offering made by the broadcasters, by placement of fetters that have no co-relation to the method or manner of offering content to the subscriber.

    · A broadcaster’s effective freedom to price its channel with a view to recover/recoup its every increasing investment into content creation, is being taken away. The earlier imposed cap that prohibited any channel priced at more than Rs 19, as per the 2017 Interconnection Regulations and 2017 Tariff Order, has now been unilaterally and arbitrarily reduced to Rs.12 by the Impugned Provisions.

    · A broadcaster’s freedom to offer its channels as part of one or more bouquets, has effectively been taken away, by prohibiting the broadcaster from offering any discount on the Maximum Retail Price of its bouquets; and further, by placing archaic and unworkable conditions to be followed by a broadcaster while creating a bouquet.

    · At the same time, the Delivery Platform Operator (“DPO”) has been given further freedom to offer channels as part of bouquet and to give discounts on bouquet prices, by unilaterally reducing the price of the channel received by the DPO from the broadcaster, has been kept intact and in fact, strengthened.

    · A Broadcaster has effectively been prohibited from offering, as part of any bouquet, Niche channels, including sports channels, whose content consists of expensive and exclusively licensed rights to broadcast sporting events.

    To address the issues, IBF on Friday also held a press conference in Mumbai. The broadcasters of India came in support of each other under the shelter of IBF to voice their concerns against the new TRAI amendments of the new tariff order. All the top bosses of the major networks have agreed to the fact that this revision is going to leave severe adverse affect on all the players. The industry may explore legal options to fight the disruption.

  • Discovery files petition against TRAI’s tariff-related consultation paper in Delhi High Court

    Discovery files petition against TRAI’s tariff-related consultation paper in Delhi High Court

    MUMBAI: Major broadcaster Discovery Communications India has filed a petition against Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (TRAI) recent consultation paper floated on 16 August. The broadcaster has prayed for quashing the consultation paper terming it “illegal and arbitrary”.

    TRAI issued a consultation paper on tariff-related issues for broadcasting and cable services, seeking stakeholders’ responses to 27 questions which covered different aspects related to the new tariff order (NTO), which came into force from 1 February 2019.

    The petition by Discovery also asks to prohibit TRAI from proceeding or taking any further steps pursuant to the paper without following the due process of law. According to sources, the petitioner has served a copy to TRAI on Wednesday and hopes to get a listing on Thursday, 29 August 2019, before the Delhi High Court.

    Amid several ongoing speculations on the change in NTO, TRAI chairman RS Sharma recently clarified that the regulatory body does not have any plan to revise the pricing framework. He also added that it is only trying to fine-tune it due to certain issues consumers are facing.