ITV

Category: High Court

  • 9X Media, B4U & MASTiii challenge FreeDish e-auction in Delhi HC

    9X Media, B4U & MASTiii challenge FreeDish e-auction in Delhi HC

    MUMBAI: Within a few days of DD FreeDish e-auction recommencement notice, 9X Media, B4U and MASTiii have filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court asking for a stay on the upcoming e-auction process as they feel the base prices are very high for small broadcasters.

    It wants the court to quash the guidelines issued by Prasar Bharati on 15 January 2019 as well as its directive to disconnect channels from 1 March 2019.

    9x Media has mentioned that it is a loss-making entity with losses of Rs 7.81 crore and negative earnings per share and such a decision could adversely impact its business. Its petition contends that FreeDish has shut the doors on small non-profit making companies from being available to the public at large and instead prefers deep-pocketed ones.

    After a long hiatus, Prasar Bharati board gave a green signal to e-auctioning of slots for DD FreeDish along with a revised policy with a change in pricing. The new policy guideline has kept five buckets for e-auction of MPEG2 slots. Bucket A+ has been kept for Hindi GECs and teleshopping channels with a reserve price of Rs 15 crore, and Bucket A has been dedicated to Hindi movie channels with a reserve price of Rs 12 crore.

    Hindi music, sports and Bhojpuri GEC and movie come under Bucket B which has a reserve price of Rs 10 crore. All news & current affairs (Hindi), All news & current affairs (English) and news & current affairs (Punjabi) channels fall under the category of Bucket C which with a reserve price of Rs 7 crore. The Bucket D with the lowest reserve price of Rs 6 crore will comprise all other remaining genres/language channels.

    9X Media contends that these categories of ‘high commercial potentiality’ and prices have not been justified by FreeDish. The petition also states that companies running news channels such as TV Today Network and Zee Media are profit-making companies and so keeping their base price lower than music channels is unjustified.

    “The channels can differ in content, viewership, class of customer, commercial potentiality, advertisement available, peak time of the channel, regions and other factors…Different music channels can have different uptake, viewership, potentiality, etc,” the document reads.

    The petitioners state that the entire process has been conducted arbitrarily without maintaining transparency. It even adds that Prasar Bharati is “misusing its status of the largest DTH operator, having largest number of subscriber base, as it claims to hold about 30 million subscribers.” Without consulting stakeholders, such decisions lead to creating monopoly in the hands of a few.

    Additionally, Prasar Bharati is seeking carriage fees which are way higher than private players even as the validity of FreeDish having 30 million subscribers is contended.

    The e-auctioning of slots onDD Free Dish were arbitrarily called off in 2017 while the last e-auction of DD FreeDish took place in July 2017. Earlier, DD FreeDish used to hold e-auction once every couple of months to award vacant channel slots to private broadcasters.

  • Calcutta HC vacates stay on TRAI tariff order, hands LCOs time till 8 February

    Calcutta HC vacates stay on TRAI tariff order, hands LCOs time till 8 February

    MUMBAI: In a major development, the Calcutta High Court, which has jurisdiction over West Bengal and the Union Territory of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, on Thursday vacated the stay imposed by it on the implementation of the tariff order till February 18.

    Local cable operators (LCOs) have now been given time till 8 February to negotiate contracts with multi-system operators (MSOs). Thereon, revenue share within the distribution value chain will be split in line with the TRAI’s tariff order.

    On Wednesday, the court had asked the TRAI to submit a report on the matter on 13 February, which is when the next hearing was due to take place. The court’s directive was a result of 80 cable operators filing a petition against the TRAI mandate.

    However, realizing the urgency of the situation, the regulator's lawyers, on Wednesday itself, filed an application to vacate the stay. 

    In its application, TRAI had argued that the court had been misled by the petitioners, and placed the Supreme Court judgment in the court. 

    The petitioners’ lawyer Debabrata Saha Roy argued that the revenue-sharing model under the new regime will significantly reduce the cable operators’ share to just nine per cent. 

    With 80% will go into the broadcasters’ kitty, MSOs stand to get just 11 per cent, thus making it an unsustainable business proposition for operators.

    Earlier the regulator had offered an extension till 31 January to the distribution platform operators (DPOs) for implementation.  

     

  • Calcutta High Court stays switchover to new TRAI tariff regime till 18 February

    Calcutta High Court stays switchover to new TRAI tariff regime till 18 February

    MUMBAI: Just two days ahead of the deadline for consumer migration to new channel packages under Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (TRAI) tariff order, Calcutta High Court has stayed the switchover till 18 February. 

    The court has also asked the TRAI to submit a report on the matter on 13 February, which is when the next hearing will take place. The court’s directive was a result of 80 cable operators filing a petition against the TRAI mandate.

    The petitioners’ lawyer Debabrata Saha Roy argued that the revenue-sharing model under the new regime will significantly reduce the cable operators’ share to just nine per cent. With 80% will go into the broadcasters’ kitty, MSOs stand to get just 11 per cent, thus making it an unsustainable business proposition for operators.

    Earlier the regulator had offered an extension till 31 January to the distribution platform operators (DPOs) for implementation.  

     

  • Madras HC dismisses PIL against TRAI tariff order

    Madras HC dismisses PIL against TRAI tariff order

    MUMBAI: After the Supreme Court verdict that went in favour of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s tariff scheme, the Madras High Court has dismissed a petition challenging this 2017 order.

    A news item by the Press Trust of India said that the bench consisting of justices S Manikumar and Subramonium Prasad also upheld the deadline of 31 January which was an extension by TRAI to the broadcast industry to finalise necessary arrangements for implementing the new tariff regime from 1 February.

    Dismissing the PIL, the HC quoted part of the Supreme Court judgment by stating that TRAI could not only regulate operations but also lay down terms and conditions for providing services. The report mentioned the HC as stating: “It cannot be said that TRAI has been acting hastily or implementing its directions in a hurried manner, without taking into account the interest of all the participants.”

    The Supreme Court’s verdict came on 30 October and from 1 February the new tariff scheme where consumers will get to decide their channels is to commence.

  • Delhi HC orders Zee Hindustan to stop using Rajat Sharma’s name in ads

    Delhi HC orders Zee Hindustan to stop using Rajat Sharma’s name in ads

    MUMBAI: Delhi HC has restrained Zee Hindustan from using the name of India TV editor-in-chief Rajat Sharma in any of its advertisements, stating that its latest ad campaign is prima facie illegal. It has directed the channel to remove any hoardings or ads that use Rajat’s name.

    Zee Hindustan, to promote its anchorless news channel, had started an advertisement campaign that made reference to some of the popular news anchors including Sharma and Republic’s Arnab Goswami using slogans like “India mein ab Rajat ki Adalat band!” (Rajat’s Adalat is now shut in India!), and “Ab Anchor nahin khabarein khud bolengi, Kyunki aap samjhdaar hain” (Since you are intelligent, news would speak for itself, without any news anchor).

    Sharma and his channel India TV filed a suit for an injunction against Zee,  claiming that the advertisement is being used to deliberately and maliciously misrepresent and disparage the image of India TV and Rajat Sharma, who has been running the show Aap Ki Adalat on different channels since 1993.

    Justice Jayant Nath of Delhi High Court impugned the advertisement saying, “The Hon’ble Court while granting the injunction in favour of Sharma and India TV, refrained Zee from using Rajat Sharma’s name in their advertisements in the electronic and print media or in any other form. The Hon’ble Court has further directed Zee to take down all hoardings containing the impugned advertisements.”

  • Madras HC declines stay on TRAI tariff order

    Madras HC declines stay on TRAI tariff order

    MUMBAI: The Madras High court rejected the interim prayer plea in a petition filed by Chennai Metro Cable TV (CAS) Operators Association declining to stay the implementation of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India's (TRAI) tariff order. Justice S Vaidyanathan issued notice to TRAI as well as posted the matter to 3 January for further hearing.

    The cable TV association’s petition was against two notifications on the new regulations issued through media releases on 19 November and 18 December fixing December 29 as the deadline for implementing the new regime. They sought to quash the two notifications along with an interim stay on the implementation of the regulations.

    The regulatory body’s council submitted that the matter was already raised before the Supreme Court. Moreover, now TRAI itself has given additional one month for smooth transition allowing consumers to choose the plan till 31 January.

    The objections were first raised by a social activist after the first communication on 19 November, as submitted by the petitioner association. It claimed that TRAI, without considering the objections, passed the second release specifying the deadline.

    Under the new regime consumers have to choose channels and local cable operators will have to collect the required fees. The petition claimed this arrangement unworkable. It also claimed it would curtail the right of consumers to see all channels.

  • HC orders stay on MIB’s licence cancellation directive to Alliance Broadcasting

    HC orders stay on MIB’s licence cancellation directive to Alliance Broadcasting

    MUMBAI: The Delhi High Court has ordered a stay on a Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) directive to a channel where it had withdrawn the channel’s licence stating that it lacked security clearance.

    Alliance Broadcasting had taken MIB to court for the issue since stating that since its security clearance had been withdrawn by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), it was liable to have its licence taken away. It even rejected its application to extend the renewal for 10 years. Further responses on this case have been sought from the MHA and MIB.

    The channel got its licence in 2007 when it was known as Real Estate and in 2014 it rebranded to News7 Tamil. Since then, the channel has maintained its reputation and had even given the required annual licence fee. In November 2017, MIB issued a show cause notice to it. After a joint hearing, the MIB ordered cancellation of its licence due to lack of security clearance certificate.

    While approaching the court, it not only wanted to overturn this but also get its extension of 10 years. It even wants the MHA to disclose the reasons for which its security clearance was rejected.

  • Madras HC TRAI-Star case: All parties keep options open

    Madras HC TRAI-Star case: All parties keep options open

    MUMBAI: Even as till late evening yesterday all those connected with the case filed by Star India and Vijay TV against regulator TRAI in Madras High Court kept waiting for the full text of the court order, options for future course of action were kept open, including whether the high court should be asked to clarify on some observations.

    As the high court, by keeping its final verdict on hold, has given two weeks time to petitioners to consider appealing in the Supreme Court, which is already in summer vacation mode with just the vacation bench active, TRAI also cannot go ahead and get its tariff order implemented immediately.

    Justice MM Sundresh, who was assigned to hear the Star TV and Vijay TV vs. TRAI case after another bench had given a split verdict, concurred with the view of Madras HC chief justice Indira Banerjee who, through an order dated 3 March 2018, had held that the TRAI Act confers upon the regulator sufficient jurisdiction to notify the said tariff order and interconnection regulation.

    However, the judge also, reportedly, struck down some other aspects of the tariff order, including an important part that capped at 15 per cent the discounts that could be offered by TV channels.  

    That all stakeholders in this court drama are keeping their cards close to the chest can be gauged from the fact the only organisation to come out with an official statement welcoming the Madras HC order, AIDCF (All India Digital Cable Federation), too had nothing to offer on a time frame for implementation of TRAI tariff order. Efforts made to elicit responses from Star India, TRAI, Indian Broadcasting Foundation or even individual media industry players drew a blank. The common refrain was: we haven’t read the actual order, so can’t comment.

    Still, after talking to various people in the industry a possible scenario that emerges hinges around petitioners going back to the Madras HC seeking clarifications on some of the observations of the court, which may take some time. After those clarifications come through, it would be decided whether to exercise the option of appealing in the Supreme Court, especially because a major pivot of the case is the copyright of TV channels over the content it generates and whether TRAI has any jurisdiction over such copyright issues.

    With the present TRAI Chairman RS Sharma’s tenure ending in a few months time, he would ideally like to see the tariff order, issued during his tenure, implemented before his superannuation.

    Also Read:

    Third Madras high court judge gives TRAI tariff order thumbs up

    Madras HC gives split verdict in Star India versus TRAI case

    MSOs move Madras HC seeking relief on inter-connect pacts

    Orders reserved by Madras HC on TRAI jurisdiction case

  • TV ad-cap case in Delhi HC deferred till Jan ’18, Home Cable matter to come up too

    TV ad-cap case in Delhi HC deferred till Jan ’18, Home Cable matter to come up too

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has again adjourned the hearing of the case of ad cap on television channels, this time to early next year, as the concerned bench was hearing part-heard matter.

    On 21 April 2017, the matter, which will now be heard on 16 January, 2018, had been put off by the concerned bench for the same reason. Earlier, on 12 January 2017, it had been put of as the then Chief Justice G Rohini did not sit that day. The matter had come up today before the acting chief justice Gita Mittal and justice Jayant Nath.

    In the hearing on 29 March 2016, a plea was made on behalf of the information and broadcasting ministry that a proposal was being contemplated to amend the relevant provision relating to limiting ads to 12 minutes an hour.

    (Thus, the hearing has been pending for almost three years since then information and broadcasting minister Arun Jaitley in January 2015 had said at a public function that he did not see the need for any kind caps on the media.)

    When the case comes up next, the court is also expected to take up an application by the intervenor — Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd — seeking vacation of the order that had stayed action against (ad cap rule) ‘violating’ television channels.

    On 13 May 2016, the court had agreed to take up vacation of stay at the next hearing. The court had, on 11 February 2016, agreed to take up the application by Discovery Communications to intervene in the matter.

    Earlier, on 27 November 2015, the court presided over by the chief justice had said the matter had been pending for sometime and, therefore, it would hear and conclude the case in the next hearing.

    On that day, the MIB had informed the court that it was in talks with the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) and other stakeholders on the issue of the advertising cap. This was the first time that the ministry had put in an appearance in the petition filed by the NBA against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and others.

    The case, filed by NBA and others against TRAI and the Union Government, had been adjourned from time to time on the plea that the government and the broadcasters are in talks on this issue.

    The court has already directed that the order that TRAI would not take any action against any channel pending the disposal of the petition would continue to be in force. At an earlier hearing, the court had, at the regulator’s instance, directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

    The NBA had challenged the ad-cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels. Apart from the NBA, petitions had been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamorous, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

    Meanwhile, a separate petition filed in the high court by Vikki Choudhry and Home Cable Network, which too will be heard on the next date, seeks to charge MIB with dereliction of duties in taking action against the ‘offending’ pay TV broadcasters for violating the terms and conditions of the licenses/permission for uplinking and downlinking.

    The court had in June last year asked the ministry to file its reply in four weeks in this matter. A notice was issued only to the ministry, although the petition also listed several other broadcasting companies as respondents.

    Also read:   

    TV adcaps case in Delhi HC deferred to 20 April

    Cap on TV ads, challenge to stay ‘action against channels’ hearing put off

    137 GEC and news pay channels violated ad cap rule in second quarter

     

  • Karti told to move petition relating to INX Media in Delhi High Court

    Karti told to move petition relating to INX Media in Delhi High Court

    NEW DELHI: Karti Chidambaram, son of former Union Minister P Chidambaram, will have to go to the trial court or the High Court in Delhi with his petition seeking to quash a Central Bureau of Investigation FIR in a bribery case involving INX Media.

    The Madras High Court today said the case does not come under its jurisdiction and the Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction in this case.

    Karti had moved the court after a Supreme Court order asked him to appear before the CBI in its New Delhi office on 23 August, to help the investigating agency with its probe on the alleged kickbacks that his company, INX Media paid to get clearances from the Foreign Investment Promotion Board.

    Karti had told the Supreme Court that he is ready to appear before the agency today itself, but needs protection. While directing him to appear before the CBI, the SC told Karti to carry with him all documents necessary.

    The Madras High Court, in an earlier order this month, had stayed the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against Karti and four others. The Supreme Court had later said that it would review the HC order cancelling the LOC issued by Foreigner Regional Registration Officer (FRRO).

    On 16 May, CBI raided the Chidambaram residence in Chennai, along with 13 other locations in New Delhi, Gurugram, Mumbai and Chandigarh. The raids were regarding a 2007 case in which INX Media had allegedly paid bribes to get an FIPB approval.

    While the clearance granted was only for Rs 40 million, the actual foreign investment was reportedly much higher. An FIR was filed against Karti, Indrani Mukherjee and Peter Mukerjea, who owned INX media.