ITV

Tag: Apex Court

  • Apex Court permits Reliance Communication to sell its assets to Reliance Jio

    Apex Court permits Reliance Communication to sell its assets to Reliance Jio

    MUMBAI: The Apex court had recently permitted Reliance Communications Ltd to sell its assets to Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd.  On Friday, the Supreme Court cleared a settlement between RCom and the Indian unit of Swedish telecom equipment maker Ericsson AB, making it easier for the sale of the telecom operator’s assets.

    According to a report on Mint, the judgement regarding the sale of assets was delivered by a two-judge bench headed by justice R.F. Nariman. The bench directed Reliance Communications to pay Rs 550 crore to Ericsson by 1 October and asked RCom chairman Anil Ambani to give an undertaking to this effect. On 1 October, the apex court will also hear RCom’s plea to close the insolvency case. Bloomberg reports that Ericsson has objected to the settlement terms of the insolvency case.

    The report further notes that that the sale of RCom’s assets will reduce the lenders’ exposure by 50 per cent and it owes about Rs 42,000 crore to its lenders. As part of the deal, Reliance Jio will get 122.4 MHz of 4G spectrum in the 800/900/1800/2100 MHz bands. It will also get 43,000 towers and 1,78,000 RKM (route km) of fiber and 248 media convergence nodes that will cover five million square feet.

    Earlier in 2014, Ericsson had signed a seven-year deal with RCom to operate and manage its nationwide telecom network. The Indian unit Swedish telecom operator has stated that it has not been paid over Rs 1,000 crore. Earlier It has claimed outstanding dues of Rs 16,000 crore but settled for Rs 550 crore. The sale of Reliance Communications’ telecom assets to Reliance Jio is pegged at Rs 25,000 crore and the sale is expected to complete within the next three weeks.

    At the end of the deal, Reliance Jio will get more telecom assets to expand its wired and wireless business in the country. It will mainly help with Jio’s impending commercial availability of Reliance Jio GigaFiber service.

  • SC nixes TRAI’s compensation directive for call drops

    New Delhi: In a judgment that comes as a major relief to telecom operators even as it hits the users, the Supreme Court today held as arbitrary and unconstitutional a decision by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in October last year  imposing a compensation for call drops.

    The decision came on an appeal by the the telcos after their petition in the Delhi High Court was dismissed in December last against the directive of compensation of Rs one for every call drop, limited to a maximum of three such calls per day. The TRAI order of October last year was to come into effect from 1 January.

    The Apex Court said the order was “illegal and not transparent”.

    Talking to newspersons outside the court, telecom operators counsel Kapil Sibal said: “(The) SC has rendered historic judgement today by striking down Trai s regulation.”

    “The court said the regulation was unreasonable, arbitrary and the procedure followed was not transparent,” he added. 

     

  • SC nixes TRAI’s compensation directive for call drops

    New Delhi: In a judgment that comes as a major relief to telecom operators even as it hits the users, the Supreme Court today held as arbitrary and unconstitutional a decision by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in October last year  imposing a compensation for call drops.

    The decision came on an appeal by the the telcos after their petition in the Delhi High Court was dismissed in December last against the directive of compensation of Rs one for every call drop, limited to a maximum of three such calls per day. The TRAI order of October last year was to come into effect from 1 January.

    The Apex Court said the order was “illegal and not transparent”.

    Talking to newspersons outside the court, telecom operators counsel Kapil Sibal said: “(The) SC has rendered historic judgement today by striking down Trai s regulation.”

    “The court said the regulation was unreasonable, arbitrary and the procedure followed was not transparent,” he added. 

     

  • Committee set up to monitor Government advertisements in accordance with Supreme Court directions

    Committee set up to monitor Government advertisements in accordance with Supreme Court directions

    NEW DELHI: A three-member committee headed by former chief election commissioner B.B. Tandon is to address issues related to Content Regulation in government advertising.

    The Information & Broadcasting ministry has set up the committee in compliance with the Supreme Court directions dated 13 May 2015 and the other members are News Broadcasters Association President and the editor-in-chief of India TV Rajat Sharma, and Ogilvy & Mather executive chairman and creative director, South Asia Piyush Pandey.

    The three member committee was selected by a three member panel constituted by ministry after obtaining advice from the Law ministry. The selection panel for constitution of the committee was headed by Press Council of India chairman Chandramauli Kumar Prasad.

    The terms of reference of the committee has been prepared by the I&B ministry in consultation with the Law ministry which includes the structure, functions and powers, duties and responsibilities of the committee. The Supreme Court had given the direction for ironing out the creases that are bound to show from time to time in implementation of the judgement of the apex court on Content Regulation of Government Advertising.

    Under the terms of reference, the committee would address complaints from the general public of violation on the implementation of the guidelines set out by the Supreme Court.

    The committee would also take suo motu cognizance of any violation / deviation of the guidelines of the Supreme Court and recommend corrective action to the ministry /department.

    The committee may recommend suitable changes to the Supreme Court guidelines to deal with new circumstances and situations that may arise from time to time, without making major policy changes within the policy direction of Supreme Court. The committee shall not be bound by any legal rules of evidence and may follow such procedure that appears to it to be fair and proper for swift settlement of grievances. For all decisions of the committee, the view of majority would prevail.

    The tenure of the members would be initially for a period of two years which shall be extendable by one year at a time, but overall extension should not be more than two times. The committee would be operational from Delhi and the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity would facilitate day to day functioning of the committee.

  • Committee set up to monitor Government advertisements in accordance with Supreme Court directions

    Committee set up to monitor Government advertisements in accordance with Supreme Court directions

    NEW DELHI: A three-member committee headed by former chief election commissioner B.B. Tandon is to address issues related to Content Regulation in government advertising.

    The Information & Broadcasting ministry has set up the committee in compliance with the Supreme Court directions dated 13 May 2015 and the other members are News Broadcasters Association President and the editor-in-chief of India TV Rajat Sharma, and Ogilvy & Mather executive chairman and creative director, South Asia Piyush Pandey.

    The three member committee was selected by a three member panel constituted by ministry after obtaining advice from the Law ministry. The selection panel for constitution of the committee was headed by Press Council of India chairman Chandramauli Kumar Prasad.

    The terms of reference of the committee has been prepared by the I&B ministry in consultation with the Law ministry which includes the structure, functions and powers, duties and responsibilities of the committee. The Supreme Court had given the direction for ironing out the creases that are bound to show from time to time in implementation of the judgement of the apex court on Content Regulation of Government Advertising.

    Under the terms of reference, the committee would address complaints from the general public of violation on the implementation of the guidelines set out by the Supreme Court.

    The committee would also take suo motu cognizance of any violation / deviation of the guidelines of the Supreme Court and recommend corrective action to the ministry /department.

    The committee may recommend suitable changes to the Supreme Court guidelines to deal with new circumstances and situations that may arise from time to time, without making major policy changes within the policy direction of Supreme Court. The committee shall not be bound by any legal rules of evidence and may follow such procedure that appears to it to be fair and proper for swift settlement of grievances. For all decisions of the committee, the view of majority would prevail.

    The tenure of the members would be initially for a period of two years which shall be extendable by one year at a time, but overall extension should not be more than two times. The committee would be operational from Delhi and the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity would facilitate day to day functioning of the committee.

  • SC guidelines on govt ads might impact TV channels

    SC guidelines on govt ads might impact TV channels

    MUMBAI: Television channel and newspaper sales execs may be in for a bit of a shocker. Those gigantic ads and long running TVCs by state governments featuring Chief Ministers and other local political leaders mug shots tom-tomming their and their political parties’ achievements could well dry up.

     

    The reason: the Supreme Court (SC) today issued guidelines relating to Central government advertising, which are put out using public money. The guidelines clearly forbid the use of photographs of chief ministers, government bureaucrats and appointees and other political leaders in government ads. They however permit the use of the photographs of the President, the Prime Minister, Chief Justice of India, departed leaders, including Mahatma Gandhi in these ads.

     

    The apex court however refrained from disallowing the government to issue public advertisements six months prior to an election. It added that governments can’t be allowed to use public money for unproductive purposes like giving advertisements for political gains.

     

    Industry experts believe that the Supreme Court guidelines could impact the revenues of some media groups.

     

    A media observer tells Indiantelevision.com, “Local state governments, from time to time, release boastful ads and TVCs featuring their CMs in newspapers and on TV channels as a bit of a quid pro quo for favourable coverage and positioning of the parties and their representatives in the media. I don’t think any state CM will allow the ad expenditure if it does not feature him or her, because they tend to use it to build their own image.”

     

    Another expert opines that it is quite likely that the media managers could well divert government ad spending toward social and mobile media as the SC restrictions do not apply to them – at least as yet. This could be in the form of viral campaigns both as videos, and textual posts.

     

    Watch this space for further news.

  • Apex Court yet to decide on matter of inducting DD correspondents in Indian Broadcasting Service

    Apex Court yet to decide on matter of inducting DD correspondents in Indian Broadcasting Service

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court is still to decide on an appeal by the Government against orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) Hyderabad and Andhra Pradesh High Court that television news correspondents and assistant news correspondents in Doordarshan should be considered to be inducted into the Indian Broadcasting (Programme) Service.

     

    The orders of November 2000 and March 2014 of CAT and the High Court respectively also said these staff should be provided with all benefits of service and be considered for promotion to JAG in accordance with their experience, eligibility and suitability. The High Court had stayed the matter with regard to taking the news correspondents into the IB(P)S.

     

    Minister of state for Information and Broadcasting Rajyavardhan Rathore told the Rajya Sabha today that TV NCs /TV ANCS were engaged as Artists on Casual contract basis for a period of six months in 1988. In March 1989 it was decided to engage them as “Artists” on a fresh contract of five years. In May 1993 they were declared as regular temporary Government Servants with retrospective effect from 1988.

     

    In the absence of Recruitment Rules for this cadre, they could not be granted promotion. However, eligible officers were given Assured Career Progression/Modified Assured Career Progression.

     

    Two posts of Special News Correspondent and one post of Principal Correspondent were created on 27 August 2010 to open the promotional avenues in the cadre in pursuance of the order of the Principal Bench of CAT in Delhi. No appeal was filed by the Centre.

     

    The Recruitment Rules for these employees have been notified on 24 March 2014 which provide for promotion to the higher grades.

  • Apex Court sets up panel to study issuance of ads glorifying politicians

    Apex Court sets up panel to study issuance of ads glorifying politicians

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has formed a three-member panel to frame guidelines to regulate government advertisements glorifying politicians in media.

     

    The apex court bench headed by chief justice P Sathasivam said that the existing guidelines of the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity (DAVP) do not cover such advertisements.

     

    The panel will be headed by Prof NR Madhav Menon, founder director of Bangalore’s National Law University. TK Vishwanathan, former Lok Sabha secretary general and senior advocate Ranjit Kumar are the other two members of the panel. The report has to be submitted to the court in three months.

     

    The court has asked Information and Broadcasting Ministry secretary Bimal Julka to coordinate the meetings of the committee.

     

    The court passed the order on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the NGOs Common Cause and the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) pleading it to frame guidelines. The petition sought issuance of guidelines for curbing ruling parties from taking political mileage by projecting their leaders in official advertisements.

     

    Counsel for Common Cause, Meera Bhatia, had earlier said that the glorification of politicians linked to the ruling establishment, in order to attain political mileage at the cost of public exchequer, was violative of Article 14 of the constitution.

     

    But counsel representing CPIL, Prashant Bhushan, had told the court that there was nothing wrong in issuing advertisements and informing the public about the programmes of the government. However, he had said such advertisement campaigns become arbitrary and malafide when aimed at gaining political mileage.

  • Spectrum is a valuable national revenue and cannot be given free, says apex Court

    Spectrum is a valuable national revenue and cannot be given free, says apex Court

    NEW DELHI: Holding that spectrum is a valuable national resource and not meant for charity, the Supreme Court has asked the government to explain reasons allocating additional spectrum to GSM telecom operators allegedly free of cost.

    A bench headed by Justice G S Singhvi said: “Spectrum is taken by the Centre from the army on the name of developing telecom sector and to provide service to the common man.”

    “The price of spectrum is thousands of crores. It is a national resource and it cannot be alloted free of cost. You must follow due procedure for allocation of natural resources,” the bench said.

    It also imposed a cost of one lakh rupee each on Centre and seven telecom companies, including Bharti, Vodafone, Reliance and Idea Cellular, for not filing their response during the last one year on a plea challenging allotment of excess spectrum.

     

    “More than a year has passed but you have filed counter. The issues raised in the petition are serious and requires serious consideration,” the bench said asking the parties to deposit the money in the Supreme Court Legal Services Authority.

    The court was hearing a petition seeking cancellation of 2G spectrum beyond 2×4.5 MHz for metros and 2×4.4 MHz for other circles allocated since 1996 to the telcos without charging additional fee.

    The petitioner alleged that while allotting additional spectrum, the Centre ignored its own order of 1 February 2002, which said that “additional allocation could be considered only after a suitable subscriber base, as may be prescribed, is reached.”
    In another case, the Court rejected several petitions seeking recall of its 11 April 2011 order that barred the Delhi High Court from entertaining any plea against orders of Special CBI court hearing 2G cases.

    Pronouncing the judgment, Justice Radhakrishnan said it would be in the larger public interest and in the interest of the accused as well that the trial should proceed unhampered on day-to-day basis.

    Rejecting the pleas of Shahid Balwa, Vinod Goenka, Rajiv Agarwal, Asif Balwa and Ravinder Kumar Chandolia, a bench comprising of Justice G.S. Singhvi and Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan also rejected the plea for framing guidelines on the monitoring of investigations by the apex court. The court said it was only monitoring the investigation being undertaken by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the enforcement directorate and not monitoring the trial in 2G cases.

    The apex court by its April 2011 order had said: “We also make it clear that any objection about appointment of Special Public Prosecutor or the Assistant Advocate or any prayer for staying or impeding progress of the trial can only be made before this court and no other court shall entertain the same. The trial must proceed on a day-to-day basis.”

    The petitioners have sought the recall of the latter part of the order which had said: “…any prayer for staying or impeding progress of the trial can be made only before this court and no other court shall entertain the same. The trial must proceed on a day-to-day basis.”

    The petitioners had also sought vacation of a 9 December 2012, order by which the apex court had stayed all the proceedings before Delhi High Court arising from the order of the 2G special court. The apex court had reserved its order on 21 August 2013.

  • SC tells ESPN to call on it, if govt. seeks to coerce

    SC tells ESPN to call on it, if govt. seeks to coerce

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court told ESPN-STAR Sports that it could approach it in case the latter finds itself being coerced by the Central government for not sharing its exclusive feed of the just concluded India-South Africa cricket series with Prasar Bharati.

    The court disposed of the application holding that with the statement of the government, nothing survives in the application.

    The bench, comprising Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice Dalveer Bhandari, on recording the statement of Additional Solicitor General Amrender Saran, that till date, the government had not taken any coercive step, and if it decides to do so, it would issue a show-cause notice, said then the applicant would be free to approach the court, as the series is already over.

    Incidentally, a petition challenging the government guidelines to compulsorily share feed of every national or international tournament with the public broadcaster, namely Doordarshan, in public interest is already pending in the court.

    Earlier, senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the channel, had contended that his application was for stay of coercive steps and must not be confined to the India-South Africa cricket series.

    ESPN-Star Sports had last week stated that it had filed a writ petition in the Delhi High court seeking to quash the downlinking guidelines, issued in November 2005, compelling the television channels to share the telecast of all matches, even if they were played outside India. This petition was subsequently shifted to the apex court.

    The petitioner had said that though it had exclusive rights for the telecast of the matches, it apprehended that the government would penalise the channel by invoking the provisions under the downlinking guidelines.

    Prasar Bharati had requested it to share the Star-ESPN feed with Doordarshan’s terrestrial channel and proposed sharing of revenue in the ratio of 75:25.

    ESPN-Star Sports had said it would be willing to share the dirty feed (the signal along with advertisements and logo) provided Prasar Bharati paid Rs 35 million for one-day internationals as compensation for loss of subscription revenue.

    It was apparent that Prasar Bharati only wanted to make money and was not really interested whether the public were able to watch cricket matches or not, the petitioner had argued.

    It had sought quashing of the guidelines on downlinking policy.

    In response to that and the hearings today, the Apex court today told ESPN to come back to it if they felt coercion is being resorted to.