Passing orders on the petitions filed by Star India Private Limited and its subsidiary Vijay Television Private Limited, the Chief Justice upheld the impugned regulations, the tariff order on pricing and packaging of TV channels offered in a bouquet and a cap on channel prices.
"In my considered view, the challenge to the impugned regulation and the tariff order fails," she said in her order.
In his dissenting judgement, Justice M Sundar struck down various provisions in the tariff order which touch upon content of the programmes of broadcasters as not in conformity with the parent Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) Act.
In view of the dissenting judgement, the Chief Justice referred the matter to the next available judge in order of seniority for nomination of the judge before whom the matter may be placed for adjudication.
Contending that the impugned order and regulations were unconstitutional and ultra vires of the provisions of the TRAI Act, 1997 in as much as they were beyond the scope of the jurisdiction of the regulatory authority, they sought to quash the same.
Among others, the TRAI regulations said channels when given in bouquets should not be a mix of pay channels and free to air channels, and mandated that a bouquet should not contain any pay channel where the maximum retail price (MRP) was more than Rs.19.
Besides, the regulations also mandated that MRPs of broadcasters should be uniform for all distribution platforms.
Justice Sundar, who delivered a separate 113-page dissenting order, concurred with the submissions of senior counsels P.Chidambaram and Abhishek Singvi who had appeared on behalf of the petitioners, and struck down the impugned provisions which touch upon content of the programmes of broadcasters as not in conformity with the parent act.
The Chief Justice upheld the provisions while concurring with the submissions of senior counsel P Wilson for TRAI.
She said the regulations do not put an inflexible cap on pricing. The cap was only on the pricing of channels offered in a bouquet and not otherwise.
Justice Banerjee said the restrictions on the pricing of bouquets were made apparently in the interest of the end users who may not be duped or misled by inclusion of any number of free channels and less popular channels that make a bouquet appear to be lucrative by sheer reason of number of channels in it.
"I am unable to agree with the conclusion of Justice M Sundar that the provisions of the regulation and the tariff order are not in conformity with the TRAI Act. In my view the impugned provisions neither touch upon the content of programmes of broadcasters, nor liable to be struck down," she said.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
