Regulators

Mumbai High Court postpones cable case to 18 June

http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/smartcrop_800x800/public/images/regulators-images/2015/11/14/Untitled-1.jpg?itok=W27DtcD6

MUMBAI: The trade was anxiously awaiting a decision but none was forthcoming. A division bench of the Mumbai High Court comprising Chief Justice CL Thakker and Dr Dhananjay Chandrachud today further postponed the crucial hearing of the "cable case" to 18 June 2003.

 

Chaitanya D Mehta, representing the chief petitioner Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) member of Parliament Kirit Somaiya and other politicians, opened proceedings by stating the original petition is not restricted merely to monthly cable charges payable by the consumer. Mehta stated that the other issues included disconnections, black outs by cable operators, incorrect disclosures and non payment of applicable taxes to the state and Central government.



During the court room proceedings a lot of inconsistent statements were made by the assembled lawyers. For instance, Mehta read out the applicable sections which stated that the Union government was empowered to dictate the ceiling rate of the monthly cable charges. However, it is important to note that he was quoting from the recently amended Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Amendment Bill 2002 which empowers the government to determine the ceiling price of free-to-air (FTA) channels - and not the pay channels. Also, industry sources present in the court mentioned that some of these sections will only become applicable from 14 July 2003 when conditional access system (CAS) commences in the metropolitan cities.



Mehta also appealed to the Lordships to postpone the hearing to 18 July as the Central government is supposed to ratify certain aspects of CAS by 17 July 2003 - three days after the implementation process commences!



However, Mehta was bang on target when he raised the issue of compliance. He pointed out that there could be 2 million subscribers in the city of Mumbai but the statistics available with the government indicated the figure was in the region of 4,47,000. He also mentioned that the government should be earning revenues of Rs 60 million per month instead of the Rs 13 million that it is getting. He questioned as to why the state and central government enforcement authorities (excise department, income tax department officials and the legal authorities such as the police) had failed to enforce and interpret the laws correctly.



Mehta wondered whether there was a nexus between the enforcement authorities and cable operators. He stated that the laws clearly said that cable operators must maintain a maintenance register in the prescribed form and produce (on demand by the enforcement authorities) information on all aspects of their business including the exact number of customers serviced.



Mehta also quoted sub sections 3, 4A, 5 amongst others which empowered enforcement authorities to seize equipment of defaulting cable operators. He pointed out that the broadcasters had admitted (in their petition as well as in public statements) that only 25 per cent of the actual subscriber base was declared by the cable trade.



This line of reasoning was seconded by Doordarshan / Prasar Bharati lawyer additional solicitor-general of Maharashtra SB Jaisinghani. Jaisinghani wondered as to why the enforcement authorities had failed to conduct a single raid on any cable operator till date. He appealed to the lordships to give the requisite instructions to the enforcement authorities.



The lawyers of the cable operators raised the issue of the chief petitioner (BJP MP Somaiya) misguiding the general masses by wrongly informing them (through banners in public places) that the High Court order of 7 March included an injunction against raising cable charges. One of the lawyers representing respondent No 25 (cable distributor Sada Kadam) and Mumbai Cable Operators Federation lawyer AM Saraogi urged the lordships to clarify that they had not passed an injunction. They said that the "political gimmick" was affecting the day-to-day cable business.



The lawyers representing the cable operators also stated that the consumers were taking recourse to the incorrect or partly correct interpretations made by the chief petitioners in their public communication and refraining from making monthly cable payments. They pointed out that petition of the chief petitioner mentioned that the broadcasters were charging Rs 240 per month for pay channels. They argued that the cable trade was willing to charge Rs 150 as long as the chief petitioner was willing to compensate the difference in amount.



Meanwhile, MSO InCablenet lawyer Janak Dwarkadas again requested the Lordships to give their verdict as the broadcasters were cutting signals to the MSOs for non-payment of dues whereas the consumers refused to pay in lieu of the incorrect messages sent out by the chief petitioners and politicians.



After the Lordships postponed the hearing to 18 June 2003, some of the assembled members of the cable trade mentioned that the case would drag on till July 2003 when CAS would come into effect.



"There is no will to sort out the problem. However, it is a win-win situation for the politicians. Even if their petition is dismissed, later on, they can admit that they tried their best and score political brownie points. But, the trade will continue to suffer due to consumers refusing to pay and taking recourse to the campaign of the politicians. With the decision being postponed, we shall have to battle on in order to collect our rightful dues," says a cable operator on condition on anonymity while speaking to indiantelevision.com.

Latest Reads

http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/29/arnab_0.jpg?itok=_P4WZ1fc
Delhi HC notice to Goswami, asks for avoiding rhetoric in Tharoor-Sunanda story

Even as it asked him to avoid rhetoric in his reports, the Delhi High Court today issued notice to Republic TV and Arnab Goswami over the Congress leader Shashi Tharoor’s defamation plea.

Regulators High Court
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/24/TRAI1.jpg?itok=Qfx7_uNg
TRAI to hold discussions on net neutrality, spectrum in Mumbai

Given the complicated issues around net neutrality, an open house discussion is to be held in Mumbai on 26 May, 2017on Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s consultation paper on the issue NN and free data schemes. Earlier, a similar OHD was held in Hyderabad on 24 October 2016.

Regulators TRAI
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/24/High%20court.jpg?itok=hCs4yhVX
Delhi HC notice to Arnab Goswami on 'theft' suit by Times group

NEW DELHI: Delhi High Court, which had earlier issued summons, has now issued a notice to Republic TV’s Arnab Goswami in a case filed against him by former employer Bennett, Coleman and Company Ltd (BCCL), owners of Times Now news channel. The complainant had alleged breach of employment contract...

Regulators High Court
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/18/Trai800.jpg?itok=qROXCSE5
TRAI may invite ideas to boost b'cast & tele-products manufacturing

MUMBAI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) will consider studying the issue of testing and quality of mobile phones and set-top boxes as part of a wider consultation to boost manufacturing of telecom and broadcasting products. The issue is important because telecom operators had...

Regulators TRAI
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/16/MIB-800.jpg?itok=cIBqWB1o
New portal to help ease of broadcast business

A new online 'broadcastseva' portal has been launched by the ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB) as part of its initiative to provide a single point facility to various broadcast-related stakeholders and applicants for various permissions, registrations, licences, etc

Regulators I&B Ministry
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/13/TATA-AIRTEL-02-Story.jpg?itok=952OgxMG
Tata Sky-Airtel case: HC asks TRAI to file reply before 25 July

The Delhi High Court today issued notice to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India on two different petitions by direct-to-home platforms Tata Sky and Airtel Digital challenging the Tariff and the Reference Interconnect Order regulations.

Regulators TRAI
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/12/TRAI1.jpg?itok=yuwHrG-8
Ease of doing b'cast biz date extended to 19 May

NEW DELHI: With the fast-changing regulatory framework for the media and entertainment sector, which in India is one of the fastest growing sectors, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India had last month embarked on a major exercise to find out easier ways of doing business and cause least...

Regulators TRAI
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/11/delhi-high-court-800x800_0.jpg?itok=go921lKs
Tata Sky & Airtel DTH pleas against TRAI tariff in Delhi HC on Friday

The petition by direct-to-home platform Tata Sky challenging the Tariff and the Reference Interconnect Order regulations of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India is slated for hearing in the Delhi High Court tomorrow (Friday).

Regulators TRAI
http://www.indiantelevision.com/sites/drupal7.indiantelevision.co.in/files/styles/340x340/public/images/tv-images/2017/05/08/Madras-HC02-Story.jpg?itok=dht9cmGE
SC stays new TRAI tariff, asks Madras HC to complete hearing in four weeks

The Supreme Court of India has granted a stay on TRAI's new tariff orders. A division bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice Rohinton Fali Narman and Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose has agreed to the demand of Star India staying the new tariff order and interconnect regulations.

Regulators High Court

Latest News

Load More

Sign up for our Newsletter

subscribe for latest stories