In a setback to Republic TV
Network, the Bombay High Court has declined to entertain a writ petition by
Republic TV and Republic TV Bharat proprietor, ARG Outliers against Digital
Multi-System Operators (cable TV operators), legal news website BarandBench.com
has reported.
The company had sought the court's
intervention in restraining cable TV operators from taking its channels off
air.
Alleging that the "Shiv Cable
Sena" had threatened cable TV operators with public agitations if its
channels were not taken off the air, the Network apprehended that cable TV
operators would halt the transmission of its channels.
The government's counsel Jyoti
Chavan argued that a writ against the Shiv Sena was improper since the Sena was
a private entity.
The Bench of Justices Milind Jadhav
and Nitin Jamdar stated that the company could approach the appropriate law
enforcement authority against the Sena's alleged intimidation.
Wanted To Stay Updated & Gain Knowledge. Join Our What'sApp Group Here.
Apart from this, the Sena's threats
as alleged had no legal force, since it was a private entity and could not
impact the contractual relationship between Republic and the cable TV
operators, nor its license to broadcast, the court ruled.
"The (...) Shiv Cable Sena is
not a statutory authority to either supersede the license granted to the Petitioners
or to interfere in the contractual/statutory relationship between the
Petitioners and the cable network operators. The communication issued by it
has, therefore, no effect in law", reads the order.
Republic TV's Counsel, Senior Advocate Nikhil Sakhardande conceded that the Telecom Dispute Settlement Appellate Tribunal would have been the ideal forum to adjudicate its grievances, but submitted that the Tribunal was closed till September 18. The Network sought the court's intervention to restrain cable operators from taking the channels off air until the Tribunal commenced functioning.
The court observed that the cable
TV operators had not yet taken down the channels, at least insofar as the court
was concerned since this fact was not placed on record by the Petitioners. Even
if the operators did halt the transmission of the channels, it could not be
argued that it was solely on account of the alleged intimidating messages from
the Sena, the court further reasoned.
With these observations, the court
disposed of the petition.
Source Link
0 Comments