ITV

Tag: Justice Jayant Nath

  • Ad cap & linked case put off to Sept; court to hear plea against stay order

    Ad cap & linked case put off to Sept; court to hear plea against stay order

    NEW DELHI: With no resolution in sight to the imbroglio relating to adcaps on television channels, the Delhi High Court has adjourned the hearing one more time, this time to September 29, 2016.

    The matter had earlier been put off on May 13, 2016 to today by chief justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath as they did not have time to hear the matter in view of part-heard cases.

    When the case comes up next, court is also expected to take up an application by intervenor Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd seeking vacation of the order staying action against violating television channels.

    In the hearing on March 29, 2016, a plea was made on behalf of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) that a proposal was being contemplated to amend the relevant provision relating to limiting ads to 12 minutes an hour.

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

    Earlier on November 27, 2105, the court chaired by the chief justice, had said the matter had been pending for some time and, therefore, it would hear and conclude the case in the next hearing. On that day, 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 of 12 minutes per hour. 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, has so far 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 petition would continue. In 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, the petitions have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamorus, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

    Meanwhile, the separate petition filed in the High Court by Vikki Choudhry and Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd., which too will be heard on the next date in September, seeks to charge MIB with dereliction of its duties to take action against offending pay TV broadcasters for violating the terms and conditions of the licenses/permission for Uplinking and Downlinking.

    The Court had in June asked the Ministry to file its reply in four weeks. Notice was issued only to the Ministry, although the petition also listed several other broadcasting companies as respondents.

    ALSO READ

    Ad cap case put off to 1 August, court to hear plea challenging stay order

    Ad cap case adjourned till 15 July

  • Ad cap & linked case put off to Sept; court to hear plea against stay order

    Ad cap & linked case put off to Sept; court to hear plea against stay order

    NEW DELHI: With no resolution in sight to the imbroglio relating to adcaps on television channels, the Delhi High Court has adjourned the hearing one more time, this time to September 29, 2016.

    The matter had earlier been put off on May 13, 2016 to today by chief justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath as they did not have time to hear the matter in view of part-heard cases.

    When the case comes up next, court is also expected to take up an application by intervenor Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd seeking vacation of the order staying action against violating television channels.

    In the hearing on March 29, 2016, a plea was made on behalf of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) that a proposal was being contemplated to amend the relevant provision relating to limiting ads to 12 minutes an hour.

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

    Earlier on November 27, 2105, the court chaired by the chief justice, had said the matter had been pending for some time and, therefore, it would hear and conclude the case in the next hearing. On that day, 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 of 12 minutes per hour. 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, has so far 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 petition would continue. In 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, the petitions have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamorus, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

    Meanwhile, the separate petition filed in the High Court by Vikki Choudhry and Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd., which too will be heard on the next date in September, seeks to charge MIB with dereliction of its duties to take action against offending pay TV broadcasters for violating the terms and conditions of the licenses/permission for Uplinking and Downlinking.

    The Court had in June asked the Ministry to file its reply in four weeks. Notice was issued only to the Ministry, although the petition also listed several other broadcasting companies as respondents.

    ALSO READ

    Ad cap case put off to 1 August, court to hear plea challenging stay order

    Ad cap case adjourned till 15 July

  • Delhi HC notice to Govt on petition seeking cancellation of Ad cap violating pay channels licenses

    Delhi HC notice to Govt on petition seeking cancellation of Ad cap violating pay channels licenses

    NEW DELHI: Even as the Ad cap case is pending before it, the Delhi High Court has issued notice to the Information and Broadcasting Ministry on a fresh petition which has charged the ministry with dereliction of its duties to take action against offending Pay TV broadcasters for violating the terms and conditions of the licenses/permission for uplinking and downlinking permission/license.

    Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath asked the ministry to file its reply in four weeks.

    Notice was issued only to the ministry, although the petition also listed 21st Century Fox Inc., Star India Private Limited, Discovery Communications Inc., and Discovery Networks Asia-Pacific (South Asia) as respondents.

    Although the petition initially came up before a single bench on 19 May, it was directed to be posted before the court of the Chief Justice who is already hearing the other acap case filed by the News Broadcasters Association and others, and was heard on 27 May.

    The petitioners Vikki Choudhry and Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd. have urged the court to issue directions for cancellation of the licences of Star India and Discovery Networks Asia Pacific as they are alleged to be in violation of the license conditions agreed by them under clause 5.2 of the uplinking guidelines and clause 5.1 of the downlinking guidelines, apart from the undertaking in the form of affidavit for the Up-linking and Down-linking Guidelines, and also in violation of the provisions of section 8 of the Indian Telegraph Act 1885. It is alleged that these two have deliberately violated the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995 and rules thereunder.

    The Court has also been urged to issue writ, order or direction to the two groups to deposit the revenue earned from the advertisement during the last three financial years (FY 2015-16, 2014-15, 2013-14) with the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Central Government constituted under the Excise Act, 1944

    Directions have also been sought for the Electronic Media Monitoring Centre of the I & B Ministry to monitor all the Pay TV channels broadcast in India and report the violations of the prescribed Advertising Code under the rule 7 (10) and 7(11) of the CTN Rules, 1994 and the CTNR Act, 1995 on monthly/weekly basis.

    The petition has alleged that the Pay TV broadcasters are in continuous violation of the terms of license under the uplinking and downlinking guidelines, and have in their weekly report admitted the same. It said “all the respondent channels are being parties as matter of illustration and ease of pleadings because the rule of minutage of advertisement 12 minutes per clock hour is in existence in several countries and these channels are strictly complying with such directives in other countries whereas they are in continued violations in India”.

    It was pointed out that Star India is a 100 percent subsidiary of 21st Century Fox Inc. and Discovery Networks Asia Pacific is 100 percent subsidiary of Discovery Communications Inc.
    It said the pay TV broadcasters are indulging into profiteering at the expense of poor ordinary consumers in blatant violation of important tariff structure contained in the Uplinking and Downlinking Guidelines and permissions granted by the Ministry.

    The petitioner said it had given detailed representations to the ministry several times without getting any reply. The petitioner had written to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in this connection but received a reply that the matter pertained to the ministry.

    It has been pointed out that the Indian Broadcasting Foundation had withdrawn its petitions before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal against the Standards of Quality of Service (duration of advertisements in television channels) Regulations 2012 and assured the Tribunal that its members would comply with the law.

  • Delhi HC notice to Govt on petition seeking cancellation of Ad cap violating pay channels licenses

    Delhi HC notice to Govt on petition seeking cancellation of Ad cap violating pay channels licenses

    NEW DELHI: Even as the Ad cap case is pending before it, the Delhi High Court has issued notice to the Information and Broadcasting Ministry on a fresh petition which has charged the ministry with dereliction of its duties to take action against offending Pay TV broadcasters for violating the terms and conditions of the licenses/permission for uplinking and downlinking permission/license.

    Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath asked the ministry to file its reply in four weeks.

    Notice was issued only to the ministry, although the petition also listed 21st Century Fox Inc., Star India Private Limited, Discovery Communications Inc., and Discovery Networks Asia-Pacific (South Asia) as respondents.

    Although the petition initially came up before a single bench on 19 May, it was directed to be posted before the court of the Chief Justice who is already hearing the other acap case filed by the News Broadcasters Association and others, and was heard on 27 May.

    The petitioners Vikki Choudhry and Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd. have urged the court to issue directions for cancellation of the licences of Star India and Discovery Networks Asia Pacific as they are alleged to be in violation of the license conditions agreed by them under clause 5.2 of the uplinking guidelines and clause 5.1 of the downlinking guidelines, apart from the undertaking in the form of affidavit for the Up-linking and Down-linking Guidelines, and also in violation of the provisions of section 8 of the Indian Telegraph Act 1885. It is alleged that these two have deliberately violated the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995 and rules thereunder.

    The Court has also been urged to issue writ, order or direction to the two groups to deposit the revenue earned from the advertisement during the last three financial years (FY 2015-16, 2014-15, 2013-14) with the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Central Government constituted under the Excise Act, 1944

    Directions have also been sought for the Electronic Media Monitoring Centre of the I & B Ministry to monitor all the Pay TV channels broadcast in India and report the violations of the prescribed Advertising Code under the rule 7 (10) and 7(11) of the CTN Rules, 1994 and the CTNR Act, 1995 on monthly/weekly basis.

    The petition has alleged that the Pay TV broadcasters are in continuous violation of the terms of license under the uplinking and downlinking guidelines, and have in their weekly report admitted the same. It said “all the respondent channels are being parties as matter of illustration and ease of pleadings because the rule of minutage of advertisement 12 minutes per clock hour is in existence in several countries and these channels are strictly complying with such directives in other countries whereas they are in continued violations in India”.

    It was pointed out that Star India is a 100 percent subsidiary of 21st Century Fox Inc. and Discovery Networks Asia Pacific is 100 percent subsidiary of Discovery Communications Inc.
    It said the pay TV broadcasters are indulging into profiteering at the expense of poor ordinary consumers in blatant violation of important tariff structure contained in the Uplinking and Downlinking Guidelines and permissions granted by the Ministry.

    The petitioner said it had given detailed representations to the ministry several times without getting any reply. The petitioner had written to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in this connection but received a reply that the matter pertained to the ministry.

    It has been pointed out that the Indian Broadcasting Foundation had withdrawn its petitions before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal against the Standards of Quality of Service (duration of advertisements in television channels) Regulations 2012 and assured the Tribunal that its members would comply with the law.