7

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. --------OF 2019

[UNDER APPEAL UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE TELECOM

REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA ACT, 19971

(Against the Iillpugricci final Colllnlon Order dared 29.05.20i9

passed b y the Hon'ble Telecom Disputes Settlement 9r
AppeIlate Tribunal, New Delhi in Broadcasting Appeal No. 2 of
2018, Broadcasting Appeal No. 4 of 2018 Bi Broadcasting
Appeal No. ! of 2019)

IN THE MATTER OF:

Telccol~iRegulatory Auti~orityof Iniiia . . . Appellant

-Versus-

Hennett Colcl~ian &kc,.t\,$.& Ah%,~ k ...,

Respondents

IA NO. --------- OF 2019

APPLICATION FOR STAY
&
IA NO. --------- OF 2019
- .---.- -- -- .-
APPLICATION
. -
FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING
--.- ..--- --
CEIZTIFIED
- COPY
.- OF - THE
. IMPUGNED ORDER

PAPER BOOK
i f o r Inciex, kind11 see insitlc)

SANJAY IMPUR: ADVOCATE F O R THE APPELLANT

 Page No. of part to
1 wParth ~1c h belongPart I1
I
. .
it it 2

alLpere
----1 I
(Contents

BOO~)
(Content of
aione)

--

COURT FEE
2. O/R on Limitation
3. Listing Performa
4. Cover Page of Paper Book
5. Index of Record of Proceedinqs --

6. -Limitation Report prepared by the Registry

-

Defect List A-6

--
---- N S l to ...
-
Common Order dated 29.05.2019 l
passed by the Hon'ble Telecom Disputes Settlement
& Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Broadcasting
Appeal No. 2 of 2018, Broadcasting Appeal No. 4 of
1
1 - 20 1
2018 & Broadcastinq Appeal No. 1 of 2019
-

Civil Appeal alongwith affidavit 121 - -5 ?---A

Annexure A-1 I
I
/
Copy of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and
Cable Services) Interconnection (Digital
Addressabie Cable Television Systems) Regulations,
I 60 -781
2012 dated 30th April, 2012
Annexure A-2
Copy of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and
Cable) Services Interconnection (Addressable
77 110
I
1
I
14
Systems) Regulations, 2017 dated 3rd March 2017
--
Annexure A-3
--

C o, w' of the direction dated 08.11.2017 issued by /

i-

I /
8

the Appellant Authority 1

Annexure A-4 1 I
I IL) - / 15
Copy of the direction dated 25.04.2018 issued by
the Appellant Authority
Annexure A-5
I !
Copy of the Consultat~onPaper on "Issues related
to Placing of Television Channel on Landing Page" 16-137
dated 03.04.2018
1 17. / Annexure A-6 i I I
I
1
l90-/(16
Copy of the direction dated 0312,2018 issued by
the Appellant Authority
Annexure A-7 I I
I
i
1 1
Copy of the Broadcasting Appeal No.2 of 2018 filed
1
before Hon'ble TDSAT by Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in
1 December, 2018 I
--

IA NO. 12019
Application for Stay alongwith affidavit
 OF 2019
Applicat~onfor exemption from filing certified copy
1 of the ~nipugnedorder I 1
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA'
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
P
CIVIL APPEAL NO. ----------OF 2019

IN THE M A T T E U :
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India . . . Appellant
-Versus-
Bennett Coleman &G.
!..$$&i3 h f . e -Fe,, ... Respondents

OFFICE REPORT ON LIMITATION

1. The appeal is/ are within time.

2. The appeal is barred by time and there is delay of -------

days in filing the same against order dated ----------- and
appeal for condonation of _------ days delay has been filed.

3. There is delay of ----- days in re-filing the appeal and for

appeal for condonation of ---_-- days in re-filing has been
filed.

BRANCH OFFICER

New Delhi
Dated: 11.07.2019
 LISTING PROFORMA . .

'The ccse pertains to (Please tick /check the correct box):

Central Act: (Title) : NA

Section: NA

Central Rule: (Title):NA

Rule Nojs): NA

State Act: (Title)

Section: NA

State Rule: (Title] NA

Rule No is): NA

Impugned Interim Order: NA

Impugned 'inal Order/ Dec:ee: 29.05.201 9

High Court: NA

Names of Judges: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shiva Kirti Singh,

Chairperson and Hon'ble. Mr. A.K. Bhorgova, Member

Tribunal/ Authority: Hon'ble Telecom Disputes Settlement &

Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi

1 . Ngture of matter: Civil

2. [ a )Pe4itioner/Appellant No. 1: Telecom Regulatory Authority
of India
( b ] e-mail IC: NIL
( c j Mobile phone number: NIL

3. ( a ) Respondent No, I : Bennett Coleman &c@.

L~~Adflh~.
&,
( b ) e-mail ID: NIL
[ c ) Mobile phone number: NIL

4. ja) Main category classification: 15 (Appeal Against Orders Of

Statutory Bodies)
'
( b )Sub classification: 503 (Tribunals)

5. Not to be listed before: Nk

6(0)Similar disposed of matter with citation, i f any & case

details: No similar disposed of matter pending
6(b) Similar pending matter with case details: No'fimilar matter
pending

7. Criminal Matters:

( a ] Whether accused/convict has surrendered: Nil

jbj FIR No. Nil Dote: Nil
jc) Police Station: Nil
id) Sentence Awarded: Nil
(el Period of Sentence Undergone including period of
Detention 1 Custody Undergone: Nil

8. Land Acquisition Matters:

( a ) Date of Section 4 notification: NA
(b) Date of Section 6 notification: NA
( c ) Dote of Section 17 notification: NA

9. Tax Matters: State of tax effect: NA

10. Special Category [first Petitioner 1 Appellant only):

Senior citizen > 65 years: NA, SC/ST : NA, Women Ichild:
NA, Disabled: NA Legal Aid Case: NA, In custody: NA

1 1 . Vehicle Number (in case of Motor Accident Claim matters):

. .
NIL

Date: 1 1.07.2019

(SANJAY KAPUR)
Advocate for the Appellant
office@rpklaw.com
Registration No. 1202
 SYNOPSIS

1. The present is a statutory appeal being preferred under

Section 18 of The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

.4ct, 1997. The Appellant is a Regulatory Authority

constituted under the provisions of The Telecom

Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997, to regulate the

Telecommurucation Services (which includes the

Broadcasting and Cable Services).

2. The TKAl Act, entrusts the Appellant Authority, amongst

other functions to ensure technical con~patil~ility

and

effective interconnection between different s e r ~ l c e

providers, fix the terms and conditions of

interconnectivity and regulate arrangements amongst

service providers.

3 By the impugned judgment, while dealing with a

challenge to a direction dated 03.12.2018 issued by the

Appellant Authority to broadcasters and distributors of

television channels relating to Placement of a Channel on

Landing Page / display of television channels, the Hon'ble

TDSAT has erroneously held and decided the two legal

issues,. which have far reachng consequences. The

TDSA?' has held :-

a. The subject matter of placement of a

channel of broadcaster, by the distributor on
the landing page of a subscriber - is not
"interconnection" and hence beyond the
 F
C
power of TRAI? In other words, as per the
impugned judgment, placement is not
'interconnection' and hence beyond the
r purview of TRAI, to regulate.
~ o w e and

b. TRAI does not have the power to issue

directions regarding placement of channel
and that the same could be done by TRAI,
only through regulations.

The Appellant is filing the present appeal on the

aforesaid two primary questions of law, and not on merits

- the Impugned Order affects the power and jurisdiction

of TRAI, to regulate the Broadcasting Services.

BROADCASTING AND CABLE INTERCONNECTION

REGULATIONS, 201 7:-

4. The Appellant Authority from time to time has issued

number of consultation papers on tariff, interconnection

and quality of service, for reviewing the regulatory frame

work for broadcasting services.

5. On 03.03.2017 the Appellant Authority has notified the

Telecommunication (Broadcasting & Cable) Services

..
-
Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulation, 2017

(hereinafter referred to as ('Regulation,201 7"). Regulation

18 thereof deals with the placement / listing of channels

in Electronic Programme Guide, wherein it has been

mandated for the distributor to place channels in the

Electronic Programme Guide in such a way that the

television channels of same genre, are placed together

 u
consecutively and that one channel shall appear at one

place only.

6. Sub-rule 2 of Regulation 18, further provides that all

television channels of same language withn the same

genre shall appear together.

7. All these issues are relating to placement of channels and

are being regulated by the Appellant Authority in exercise

of its powers under section ll(l)(b)(ii),(iii)

& (iv)read with

section 36 of the TRAI Act, 1997, since the year 2012. The

said Regulations are in force and are not subject matter

of present dispute.

PLACEMENT OF A CHANNEL ON LANDING PAGE:-

8. Placement of channel is one of the activities of the

distributor.

9. Channels of a broadcaster are placed by a distributor on

specified Logical Channel Number (LCN) in the Electronic

Program Guide (EPG), for the convenience of the

subscriber who can easily identify and select the channel

number of choice instead of flipping through all the

channels.

10. The landing channel is available for display on all the Set

Top Box whenever it is switched on by a subscriber.

11. The landlng page agreements are entered into between

two service providers viz., broadcaster and distributor

and they are 'interconnection agreements' as they satisfy

the definition of 'interconnection'. A landing page

agreement involves commercial arrangements and

technical changes in the system of distributor of

television channels, so as to ensure that the channel is

provided to the consumer in that particular agreed

CHALLENGE BEFORE TDSAT :-

12. As part of placement, distributor select one channel

number generally as default channel or home channel

which can be displayed first by any Set Top Box (STB)

connected to the network, whenever it is switched on.

13. Normally the broadcasters utilize the landing page of a

distributor to reach more subscribers to get more

advertisements or popularize its programs / content /

channel.

14. The landing channel is not a natural choice of the viewer

thereby also causing undue distortion of the rating of the

TV channels - as the ratings are based on number of

subscribers watchng the landing channel on the clock

minute basis (as per audience measurement of Broadcast

Audience Research Council).

15. On this issue of placement, the Appellant Authority

issued one such Impugned Direction dated 03.12.2018

wherein, it was mandated that in order to protect interest

of service providers & consumers, and to ensure orderly

growth of the sector, all broadcasters and distributors of

television chailnels were restrained from placing any

registered satellite television channel, whose TV rating is

released by TV rating agency, on the landing Logical

Channel Number or Landing Channel.

PLACEMENT OF CHANNEL :-

16. This Hon'ble Court in the case of Delhi Science Foruin vs.

Union of India - (1996) 2 SCC 305, has held :-

" 29.. . Section 11 opens with a non obstante clause

saying that notwithstanding anything contained in
the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the functions o f the
Authority shall be as specified in the said section
including to ensure technical compatibility and
effective interrelationship between different service
providers, to ensure compliance o f licence conditions
by all service providers, to facilitate competition and
promote efficiency in the operation of
- the interest o f
telecommunication services, to protect
the consuii~ersof the telecommunication services, to
levy fees at such rates and in respect o f such services
as may be determined by regulations."

The terms interconnection and interconnection

agreements have been defined in regulation 2(x) and 2(y)

of Interconnection Regulations, 201 7, respectively, as

under:-
 .......................................................................
(xi "Interconnection" means commercial and
technical arrangements under which service
providers connect their equipments and networks to
provide broadcasting services to the subscribers;

(y) "interconnection agreement" with all its

grammatical variations and cognate expressions
means agreements on interconnection providing
technical and commercial tern7s and conditions for
distribution of signals of tzlevision channel;

The placement of channels viz. of same genre or of

same language or on the landing channel / LCN - are all

involving interconnectivit~~
between two service providers

i.e., broadcaster and distributor of TV channels.

17. In addition to the non obstante clause in beginning to

section 11(1j,the Parliament has introduced a second non

obstante clause in section ll(lj(bj(ii) which reads as

" (ii) 17otwithstanding anything contained in the

terms and conditions o f the licencz granted before
the commencement of the Telecom Regulatory
Authority of India (Amendment) Act, 2000, fix the
t e r n s and conditions of inter-connectivity between
the service providers;"

It is humbly submitted that a regulator should be

well equipped to keep pace with the emerging

technologies, which are beneficial for the consumers and

 P

1
other stakeholders. In case placeineilt of channels is held

to be not involve interconnectivity, the interconnection is

lilcely to lack behind which may inhibit the optimum

utilization of emerging efficient technologies, denpng

the benefit of this to end users / subscribers / consumers,

as well as adversely impact growth of broadcasting

sector.

SUBMISSIONS

A. Regulation 18(1) & (2) of Interconnection Regulation,

2017 deals with "placement of channels" and mandates

how a channel is to be placed. These provisions mandate

that broadcasters shall declare genre of their channel and

MSOs shall place them in the respective genre. Thus

placement of channel is nothng but part of

interconnection between broacicaster ancl distributor.

B. Paras 96 to 101 'of the Explanatory Memorandum to the

Interconnection Regulation, 2017 specifically deals with

the issue of "placement". Para 100 of the Explanatory

Memorandum to the ~ e ~ u l a t i o n2067

, categorically

provides that any commercial arrangement, which may be

given varied terms / names shall be treated as a type of

interconnection agreement. The said para reads inter alia

" It is noted that in the comments received

from the .stakeholders and the agreements
entered by service providers, varied terms like
 marketing fee, bandwidth support fee, channel
visibility fee etc. are used for different
purposes and con7mercial arrnngen7ents
between Droudcaster-s and DPOs. A n y such
commercial arrangement is a type of
interconnection agreement and therefore it
has to be o n non-difcrirninatory basis.. . "

C. The Hon'ble TDSAT had further failed to appreciate that

the placement of channels have been previously

adequately regulated whereby necessary protection has

been granted to the broadcaster so that their channels are

not placed at any disadvantageous position in the

Electronic Programme Guide (EPG) - as recorded in para

98 of the Explanatory Memorandum to Regulation, 2017.

However in t i e ~ v of the Impugned Judgment, the

Appellant ,4uthorit!; would not be in a position to regulate

placement of channel, at all.

D. The Hon'ble TDSAT erred in holding that since a landing

page agreement is sometimes subsequent to

interconnection agreement and hence could not be

termed as an interconnection. Simplyhecause in some

cases a placement agreement is separately executed

subsequent to the interconnection agreement, it could

not be held that placement is not interconnection.

E. The Hon'ble TDSAT further erred in holding that a

direction could not be issued with regard to issue relating

to placement and that the same could be done only

 through statutory provisions like the Regulations. In this
regard, i t is respectfully submitted that section 13 of the
TRAI Act, 1997 ernpowers TRAI to issue such directions

from time to time to thv service providers, as it may be

considered necessary for the discharge of its functions

under section ll(1).Thus the power of the TRAI to issue

directions is wide and pervasive. In any event, the

Impugned Direction has been issued by TRAI in exercise
of its function under section ll(l)(lrr)(ii),(iii) & (iv) of TRAI
Act, 1997 and hence covered under section 13.

F. The Hon'ble TDSAT failed to appreciate that in a

placement agreement or a landing page agreement, the

parties enter into a commercial arrangement. The

distributor of television channels also agrees to carry out
technical changes for that particular channel in its system
to be placed in a particular manner. Such activities ensure

that, the said channel is provided for the consumption of

the end-subscriber in that particular manner which has

been agreed upon.

-.
G. The Hon'ble TDSAT failed to appreciate that Section 2ix)
of Interconnection Regulations, 201 7, w'hch exhaustively
defines 'interconnection', provides that, 'interconnection'
means commercial and technical arrangements under

which service providers connect their equipinents and

networks to provide broadcasting services to the

subscribers. It follows as a logical corollary that,

 placements agreements and landing page agreements

involve 'interconnection' and they are 'interconnection

agreements'

LIST OF DATES

28.03.1997 Government of India promulgated the

Telecoln Regulatory Authority of India Act,

1997 with an objective to regulate the

telecommunication services, adjudicate

disputes, dispose of the appeals and to

protect the interest of the service providers

and consumers of the telecom sector.

09.01.2004 Government of India issued a Notification No.

39 bear-ing Order No. S014(E), amending the

definition of "Telecomn~unicationServices" in

Section 2 of TRAl Act to include broadcasting

services and cable services also.

10.12.2004 The Appellant Authority notified the first

lnterconnection Regulation for broadcasting

sector namely the 'Telecommunication

(Broadcasting and Cable Services)

I n t e r c o ~ ~ r ~ e c tRegululion,
~on 2004'(hereinafter

referred as 'Interconnection Regulations,

2001'). These were notified to regulate

interconnection arrangements between

service providers of broadcasting and cable

 services for re-transmission of signals in

analogue mode, in vogue at that time.

05.10.2010 The Appellant Authority recominended

implementation of Digital Addressable Cable

-. .
,I . . '
TV Systems ("DAS") across the country along

with a roadmap to achieve the same. DAS has

multiple advantages over the analogue

system. The said systen~addressed the issues

of capacity constraints for distributor,

provides consumers more choice of channels

and better quality of viewing etc.

11.11.2011 Government of India issued notification,

which laid d o ~ v n the roadrnap for

implementation of digitization in cable

television section in four phases starting from

June 2012.

30.04.2012 The Appellant Authority notified the

-
Telecommurzication (Broadcasting and Cable

Services) lntercoi~nection(Digital Addressable

Cable Television Systems) Regulations, 2012

(hereinafter referred to as 'Interconnection

Regulations, 2012').
16.01.2013 Ministry of Information and roadc casting
("MIB")issued 'Policy Guidelines for Television
Rating Agencies in India' for television rating

and to ensure the same is accurate, credible,

transparent and representative of the TV

audience measurement.

03.03.201 7 After due consultative process, the Appellant

Authority notified, The Telecommunication

(Broadcasting and Cable) Services

Interconnection ('4ddressable Systems)

Regulations, 201 7 (hereinafter referred as the

lnterconnection Regulations, 201 7).

08.1 1.2017 Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

("TRAI") exercising its powers under Section
13 read with Section ll(l)(b)(ii)of TRAI Act

issued the direction relating to display of TV

channels on landing Logical Channel Number

(LCNs).Vide the said direction, T M I directed

.-..

that all broadcasters and distributors of TV

channels shall restrain from placing any
registered satellite television channel, whose

T\/ rating is released by TV rating agency, on

the landing LCN or landing channel or boot up

screen withln fifteen days the date of issuance

of the said notice.

2017 A challenge was made to the aforesaid

directions dated 08.1 1.2017 issued by the

Appellant Authority before the Hon'ble

TDSAT being Broadcasting Appeal No. 1 of

2017.

03.04.201 8 In view of the challenge relating to

requirement of transparency, TFWI issued a

Consultation Paper on "Issues related to

Placing of Television Channel on Landing

Page" seeking comments/ suggestions of all

the stakeholders was isssued.

18.04.2018 Appellant Authority informed the Hon'ble

TDSAT that fresh Consultation paper has

been issued and that formal Order of

withdrawal of the said direction shall be

issued in two weeks.

20.4.2018 Comments to the Consultation Paper dated

03.04.2018 was received fr0.m Respondents,

i.e., Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd. and Zoom

Entertainment Network Ltd.

25.04.2018 TRAI issued formal direction, withdrawing

the earlier Direction dated 08.1 1.2017.

April, 2018-
May, 2018 Various other stakeholders also submitted

their comments and counter comments to the

Consultation Paper dated 03.04.2018.

T M I iss~ledthe Impugned Direction to all

broadcasters and distributors of Television

channels to restrain from placing any

registered satellite channel, whose TV rating

is released by TV rating agency, on the landing

LCN or landing channel or the boot-up screen

with immediate effect.

Being aggrieved, Respondent Nos. 1 & 2, i.e.,

Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd. and Zoom

Entertainment Network Ltd. filed

Broadcasting Appeal No. 2 of 2018 before

Hon'ble TDSAT, New Delhi, challenging the

Direction dated 03.12.2018 issued by the

Appellant Authority, seeking inter-aha, an

order quashing and setting aside the said

direction.

Being aggrieved, Respondent No.1, i.e., All

India Digital Cable Federation filed

Broadcastiilg Appeal No. 4 of 2018 before

Hon'ble TDSAT, New Delhi, challenging the

Direction dated 03.12.2018 issued by the

Appellant .Authority, seeking inter-alia, an

 order striking down the said direction as ultra

vires and illegal.

16.01.2019 Being aggrieved, Respondent No. 1, i.e., JPR

Channel, Mumbai filed Broadcasting Appeal

No: 1 of 2019 before Hon'ble TDSAT,]New

Delli, challenging the Direction dated

03.12.2018 issued by the Appellant .4uthority,

seeking inter-alia, an order setting aside and

quashing the said direction as ultra vires and

illegal.

29.05.2019 By its Impugned final common Order Hon'ble

TDSAT, New Delh, was pleased to ailow

Broadcasting Appeal No. 2 of 2018,

Broadcasting Appeal No. 4 of 2018 &

Broadcasting Appeal No. 1 of 2019 and ser-

aside the direction dated 03.1 2.2018 issued

by the Appellant Authority.

11.07.2019 Hence, the present Appeal.

 TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT S: APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
NEW DELBI

?A
Dated J 9 May,2019

Broaclcastin~Appeal No. 2 of 2018

(With M.A. Nos. 36 6; 37 of2019)

Rennctr C~olernar!& Co, Ltd. 8: Anr. . . . Appellants

Versus

Telecorn Rcg~~latory
A~lthorityof India . . . Respondent

B r o a d c a s t i ~ ~Appcal
p No. 4 of 2018
(With M.A. No.39 of 2019)

All lndia Digital Cable T,'ede~-ation . . . Appellant

Versus

< . . . Respondent
;. :, . I'clecorn Regulatory Authority of'fndia

JPR Cllanncl ~\/luinhi~i . . . Appellant

Versus

flON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHlVA KIRTl SINGH, CHAIIII'EKSON

MON'BLF, 1M1i. A.i<. BIIAI<CAVA, MEMBER
1'or Appellants (In 13.A. N o 2 of : Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr.Advocate
20 I X) hdr. Kunal Taniiun, Advocare
Mr. C:hstan Roy, Advocate
Mr. Praleek Jain. Advocate

For Appellant (In D.A.No.4 of : Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Advocate

2018) Mr. Nasir IIusain, Advocate
Mr.Vibhav Srivastava, Atlvocsle
Mr. Swapnil Ciupta, Advocate
Ms. Ncclambika Singh, Advocate

For Appellant (In R.A.No.1 of 1Mr. Sharath Sarnpath, Advocate

2018) Mr Manikya Khanna, Advocate
Ivls. Kriti Bhalla, Advocate

For llespondent-.i'IZAl : Mr. Saket Singh, Atlvocate

Mr. Arjun Natarajnn, Advocate

By S.K. Singh, Cl~airperson - All the three appra!> have been heard

togerher for final disposal bccause thc); involve common issues o f law and ihcts.

This judgment anti order shall govern all the three appeals. Broadcasting

Appe:~I No.2 01'201 8 has b ~ heart1

~ n as the lead 1na:tcr and hence reference to
+'. a .~ .t sa~:d d o c ~ l m c n ~I s be iroln the rccclrds or [liar appeal only, ~rnlcss

2. -. issued by
'l'hc appe1l;ints arc aggrieved by the directiol.~tlatccl 03.12.2018
.

[lie ~.esponderi~,
Tclccoln Regl~laloryAutilor~l)'of In~!ia[Tl<Al)it1 purported

cscrcisi. ol'powcr un~lcl.scction 13 read \\,\.it11 scc~ioilI l(l)(b)(ii) of the Telccom

 iicgularury Authority o r India Act, 1997(the Act). ?'he praycr is for quashing
3
2nd sztiing asidc the said direction annescd as Anncsurc-A.

3.
.1.he subject of [he implrgned dir-ectiori uiscloscs the relevant provisions of

r':
lnw noteti above and also tiiscloses that ir is a direction to broadcasters and

tlisiributors of television channels relating io display of television eharu~els.

After tiisclosing the statutory h~nctionsoSTRAI under the Act and that in 2004

tile Central G o v e m ~ e n tin thc Ministry of Comm~~nication

& Information

'l'echnology (Department of 'l'eleco~~ini~~nications),

vidc Notification No.39

cialed 09.01.2004 has notified broadcasting services and cable services to be

service, in Para 3 of the impugned Annexure-A it has been

teleco~nm~rnicntion

disclosed thar earlier '!'IiAl b,ad issued a direction dated 08.1 1.2017 to restrain

all the broadcasters and distributors of televisio~ic l i a ~ ~ e from

l s placing any

registered satellite ielcvision channel ~ \ ~ l i o s'1'V

e rating is released by 'I'V rating

agency, on the landing Logical Chaiiriel Number (LCN) o r Landing Channel or

l3oot-~rpScrqen. Furiher, i t has becn I-evealeti inai the said direction was

and thercalier ' T l a I , vidc i ~ sdirection datcd

ch:i!lungcd before this T'rib~~nai

25.U?.?018 repealcd tlic directior~sof OS.1 1.201'7 after obtaining the permission

of this l'ribunal.
..

4. .l'ile impi~gncddirection h~rtlltrrevi.als in various paragraphs that TRAI

h , ~ sissi~ctl a Coi1sul~:llion Paper on " I S S L I ~relatcd

J to placing of iclevision

chanlicl on 1,antling Pagc" o ~ 03.04.201S

i to scek con~~nenislsuggestionr
of all
 thc stalteholdcrs. Several comments and counter-comments were received.

'l'R41 also concluctctl :in Open l l o ~ l s etliscussion with thi: stakeholders 011

28.05.2018. On h e basis of stakzholdzrs' rcsponse and ruialysis of thc data

obtained from distributors ant1 also from Broadcast Audience Research Council
,.
i
(BAICC), TIiZI came to a conclusion that placing all the channels on landing

page influences Television Rating Point (TRP). Since rhe TW of TV channels

which uffer tliemselvrs f o r raring arc rcleased by the raring agency (and used by

advertisers), thc rarcd 'I'V channels ivii~ch find place on rhc landing LCN

deriked d~stinct advanrage on account of additional viewership. This is,

according to TRAI, ~ . c s ~ ~ l i in
i n gnon-lcvcl playing. field among broadcasters of

rated 'I'V channels. In Para 9 of the imp~igncdAmexure, TRAI has opined that

altho~ighlanding pagc is an importan1 marketing tool for broadcasters and a

distributor ibr promotion oS ti~zii.pro2r;lmIncs and services, due to its ill-effects

... .
on TN',placcmcnt of a rated 'TVciiannel on the landing page adversely affects
,

accuracy and thc crcdii~iiityo f ' i ' V r a m 2 systcm which in turn runs counter to

the purposc for television r:ltings in intii;~, which is, to have a credible system

which is said to bc prcscrltly bnsetl on rzcommendations of TRAl. T P d I has

ii:di~-~edtl::lr the c.oncc:.ncc! :lye:lcy !:i: ru!cd out tl:e ~obsibilit;'of neutra!isir,g

thc intlucrrcs of landing I,CN o n television ratings by si~itablychanging

-.
the

i ~ ~ c t h iol'msi!s~~rcnient
:~~! hccaiiss i t w a s not possible dilc lo tecimic~rllimitations.

Oillcr altelnatives to mitigate the ill-cfkcts on TKP were either not i'easiblc or

I V O L I ~inlpact
~ ti12 commercial interests ol'disrribulor<. In the penultimate para
 5
5
of the dircclion, TRAI has obsesvei! that th? landing LCN is clearly not a

narural choice uf ihl: viewer and that is the cause of distortion. TIMI has

rccortied that it is o f the considered view that rating of TV channels should be

free from any clistortion othet-wise its sanctity is affected. For that reason, in the

tinai l'ara 14, the tlirecticn I ~ L I ;is

~ ~lolloivs:
S

"14. N o w , rhzreii~rc,!hc Ai~tho~ity,

ill exercise of the poc.ers

conki~eclupon :t ilndrr section 13, rcad wirii sub-clousc (ii) of clause

(b) of sub-section (I) of section 1 I , cf tile Telecom Regulatory

Authori~yof India Act, 1997 (24 of 1997), in order 10 protect [he

iilterest of service providers and consumers atid ensure orderly g r o u ~ h

oftlie scctor, directs all broadcasters and distributors of the television

channels co rcslrain from placing any registered satellite telcvisian

channel, wliose l'\' rating is released by 'TI1 rating agency, on the

landing L C L r lan~iing.channel 3 r the boot-up szreeri wit11 irnrnediate

el'k-r. In c . of~ p r c v i ~ ~ ~ ctitcrcd

sly agl-eenlents, eCforts may 5c made

to implelr:cnt tlic\c directiorls as svon as possible ar.d i~ shall bc

irnplcmentctl in ill1 casus by 3 l i t March 2019. Ful-rhcr the inrorm;ltion

of' such pr:-exisling :~greenicntswith rull details of the parties to the

agreement, thc terrirory, ;igrccrncnt period and other r:lcvan: dcrails

.~
may be suiimitted to tlic authori~y\villjin scven days Srom the date st'

iss~tanccu i ~ h i sdisccliort 2~ en?:til:aclrbcs-l@ti.ai.gov.in."

5. Both the appellants of Appeal No.2 of2018 are broadcasters and engaged

in the business of bron~lcastingvarious TV cha~melsin India for more than 20

ycars. 'The original appellant in Appeal No.4 of 2018 is 2 Fctleration, clairnir~g

lo be lndia's apes baily for Digilal Multi-System Operators (MSOs).

Subscquenr!y, four inernbers ot' the Federation, as intlividual MSOs have also

-ror the~nse!vesimpleadcd as Appzllanis Nos.2 to 5 . Broadcasting Appeal No.1

of 2019 has also becn riled by a MSO. The appellants in all the three appeals

ore thus af't'ec~etland co\,esrd by tile impugned decision which is directed at all

broadcasters and distributors of the TV channels. l'he grounds urged by

MrMailintler Singh, Icarncd seniur co~lnsel appearing for thc appellants in

Rroadrasting Appeal No.2 of 7018 and those urged by blr.Arun Kathpalia,

learneti senior counsel appearing for 13.14.No.4 of 2018 tlo cover some distinct

and separatc grounds hut the corninon grievance of all the appellants in these

appeals is that the iinpugned dircctioii has serious adverse cffects on the

incoming revenue stream of the appellants for no good reasons. It neitker

. -
serves the interest of senlice provitiers and consumers nor learls to orderly

-gro\\;.til of the sectm. 'l'ht appellants ciaim tliat their righi to carry on trade and
l,,,si~;cs~;
"La
>..,.,.,,,.,
~ , ~ ~ h 7i,i ,, ~rwul,Lhi,~, t> and ::::cn!!ctl fix i:i:?:itrence has bczn put to jcopaiciij.

\vitl~outproviding any tiliigiblc or mcasi~rablebcnciit lo rhc consumers

-.
-.
or to

service provicicrs. According lo them it woultl impedr thc orderly growth of the

sector by aflccting thc iawf'~11source of incon!e oi' the broadcaslers and

 7

distribilrors because to co~npcnsatefor such loss they will have lo ultimately put

Inore burden on the consumers,

6. If the arguments and groi~ndsurged by Mr.Maninder Singh are given a

cc~nsolidaiedshape for rile purpose of ioci~ssztlscrutiny, it emerges that as per

si~bmissionsthe impugned directions are bad in la\\( fbr the following reasons:-

(i) They arc without juristliction as they do not re!are to

interconnection ill all;

(ii) 'The p~lrposzo f pl~ttingrestrictions in general terms upon the

rights of all the brolidcasrcrs anti distributors may be possible

o n l y by la\\. or rsgu!cirions and nor h y cscculivi: directioils;

(iii) Thc directions run contrary to provisions of relevant Regulations

of 2017 wliic!l perrnii use of landilig p21gc whereas the law is

clcar t!iat ciircctions cannot be contrary to Regulations; also

because Section 37 niandarcs to place a Kegulation before the

I'arlian~ent and therefore, it has rl~cflavoi~rand force of law

\vhereaa tlireclions, though governed by provisions of the Act,

are only eseculi\,e in rrntilri:

-.
-.

(iv) ' 1 as a subjcct lies within ihc domain and rcsponsibilily of

Ministry ol' Inibrn~arion 6L Broadcastin:: which has periniltcd

some broadc:rs~er: and a:lvcr~isci.s to genernle and circulate TRPs

 but it'is not the concern of Department ofTelecommunicalion or

' 1 "lnlerconneciiun", as defined in rhc 'l'eleco~nmunications

(Broadcasting and Cublc Service lnterconncction) (Addressable

Systcm) l<cg~~lation
2017 (ihe Regulation of 2017) does nu1

relatc to placcn~enrof a channel on any pagelplace including

landing page.

(v) In Para 99 of the Explanatory Memorandum of the Regulations

2017 a wrung attempt has beer1 rrlade to dcscribe a Placement

Agreement also as an Intcrconnection Agreement without

explaining as to \vhy the ~vol-d"main" has been used before the

~ v o r d s'iin[e~-con~~ectio~i
agrcciiicnt".

(,vi) 'TRP is not affected by the contents o l t h e landing page because

the viewer has the choice of shifting to any olher page of his

choice and ~lndcr the ncw Reg~llarions, any channel on the

la~idingpngc must illsr, bc ii cllanncl opted by rhc viewer; and

lastly,

(vii) T!ley a!.? !?on-irn!vparc!?!, arbitrary and szffer fr" non-

application of mind; thc term "television channel" is defined

-

under thc l<cgulatic~nsof 2017, lie~ice'TRAI has no powcr to

f~irlherclassiry cliaii~ielsinto r:ltecl and non-l.aled and to issue thc

irnpuznxl tlirections ill llie intcl-esl of '!'I<P1s of channels which

 voluntarily opt for ratings while aware of various l a d f u ; uses o f

landing page

7. Appearing for the appellants in Appeal No.4 o f 2018, Mr..Arun Krthpaiia,

, . ,. learncd senior counsel has no1 only suppolted tile earlier noteti submissions of
I

h,li..~ManinderSingti but Ins f i ~ ; ~ h esubinittsc

r some grounds and reasons to

:~sseilthe i r n p ~ ~ g n rdirections.
d Thesc are:-

(i) 'l'h,: source cf powcr claimed by 'TRAI for issuing the directions

under challenge relatc to TKAI's power to lay down terms ant1

conditions o i inicrconncction and to cnsure that it is effective and

technically cornpatihlc, whereas Lhc entire exercise is adniitrzdly

for p ~ ~ r l of
t y TIU' wl~ichhas nothirig ro do with interconnection;

(ii) Intcrfercncc viiih the revenuc sourcc of distyibutors is beyond the

scopc ocissuiny directions under rhc Act:

(iii) .If i h e right 01' placement of it channel on any page includes the

landing pagc :iisc in ierms of rhc Rcgu!ations of 2017, rile

directions arc e r Jcicie lcgally invalid;

(iv) Se:ction l I ( 4 ) of t h Act requires the 7 S I U I ro mainlain

:
:

trnr~sparencyso that masons :nate~.iiilsfor- a

:u~<l decision can bc

examined b ~ i tin ti);. p ~ c s c n lcosc here is no material esccpr purc

ipse disit (or :oncludins that purity of TRP of ratecl cilaru~elsis

 so vaiuablc atid i t has adverse effects to such an extent that [he

distributors nunst be deprived of thcir rccugnised source o f

revcnue through thc ratcd channels as contents of' landing page;

(v) Lastly, i t is reiteratetl that the decision is arbitrary and suffers

from non-application of mind.

8. ~Mr.Kalhpaliawoultl s~ibmitthat as against 193 rniliion total households

viewing TV programmcs, only 50000 are DARC i~ouseholds which have

reccivcd training and contribute to the data for deciding TIIP. I-Ience, the effect

of such households is negligible. Furthcr submissions of Mr. Kathpalia are to

the effect rhat it is wrong for ' f l u 1 to assume that landing page is not a choice

of the consuincrs or [hat it distorts TRP because changing o f channel would take

more than 30 seconds. Such a conclusion, according to him, is based upon no

r..-..
mataria1 or rvidcncc iind i t has been wrongly asserted in the impugned order r h a ~
i.

it is based upon a s t ~ ~ dcsrritd

y out by a stakeholder. Accortling Lo him, BARC

has not a i t l lit~ytliingabuul ~ l i s l u ~ i i oinn 'l'I<P nnucli less a signif cant distortion

r e q u i r i n ~cur~ailmcnt of an important revenue s ~ r r n i ~olr ilistribi~lors. Sucll

drastic cff'2ct shoitld no1 be perinittcd oil inert conjcclures.

9. On behrjll'uf appellant in B.A. No.1 of 2019, all thc arguments

- in other

nppenls were ailop:zd by tile leurnztl coinnsei. l i e rurther subinilted 1.hat there are

pl.actici11 dillicullics 111 iinplementing [he inipugned directions bccause it is not

 kavc cui~cntiyopted for measurement of TRl'
lcno\vn which of thc brot~ilcastc~.s

a : ~ dcontintic to bc a i-atcil channel

10. Mr.Saltet Singh, lcomed couiisel appearing for respondcnfiTM1 referred

tc l11c objects ar~tlpurpose of tile Act as indicatetl in the Preamble. I-Ie pointed
!,, ,'

out that through a notilication dntcd 09.0 1.2004, bl.oadcasting has been brought

::rider [hc ambit o!' t:!:~c;n;i:~:~iiicatioii sc;viccs and Regiilation 2 9 ) in t h ~

I<epulntions o r 2 0 1 7 dclincs broadcastil~gin very wide terms. According to him

Sectior 36 of the Act cunrcrs a wide power to frame Re~ulationsto carry out thc

purposes of the Act whereas Sectiorl 13 pe:mits issue of directions only for

discharge of functions under sub-seciioil(1) of Section 11 and that also on the

rnatrcrs specified under cl:use (b) of sub-scction(l) o f Section 1 1 . But exercise

of power under Section 13 is not made dependent upon Section 36 and hence, no

additional express limitat~onsto that cffcct are rncntioned nor tllcre is any good
. .
, . ruason to imply any sucli restriction on the power 20nfei~cdby Section 13. He

poititctl out dint directions unilzr Sectioll 13 can b r issueci only to the service

prv\,iders wlie~.eastlie llcgillations can have gencral applicability so as to impact

cvzn rlic consumers. Sincc (he poLvcr ~~lic!er

Section 36 is quitu wide hence it

contaiiis n checlc rhro~.ghthe requirement of bcing laid-down before Parliament

as providccl iii Section 37 orthe Act.

11. O n t i l t most inlpoi.tai11 i s u e touching jurisdiction, it was submitted on

bclinli' o r 'flX.41 that althouph the Act dozs not (lcline [he \vol.d
 12

, .
1
2
"intetcoi~nectio~?:',thc Regulations of 201'7through Regulation 2:x) provide that

-- Interconnectic~nmeans commercial and technical arrangements under which

scrvicr providers connrc! heir equipments and networlts to provide

broadcasting services ro the subscribcts. According to Regulation 2(y),

Interco~lnzction Agrceinent means agrccnlents on interconnection providing

technical and commercial terms ;~nclconditions for distribution of' signals of

lclcvision channels. Rcliance was placed on Paras 99-100 of the EM of the

Regula~ionsof 2017 to submit that placcrncnt also amounts to interconnection

and piacemcnt is permitted as would bc clear from the explanation to

Regulations 3(3) and 18. I-Iowcver, a ceregoricnl stand has been taken that

Kcgulations of 2017 [lo not deal ilt all with placement on [he landing page and

therefore, the directions are valid, justified and within the powers of TRAI.

Strong reliancr was placed upon the contents of thc impugned directions

including t h t EM to submit that rhc ~ssues lnvolved were discnssed in a

transparent manner nnci thsn it was found thril landing page sllowing a rated
. .

chonncl vitiatrs the conccpt o1"l'lLP and therefore, the impugned directions are

necosary iur ensuriilg p~!r.ityol'T[U'. ' l ' i ~ i swuuld cncournye good contents and
..
I;ctkii. c ~ i i i p z i i t i o ~:t~-iias
. b ~ ~ b i ~ ~ iihai
l l e dinvoiuntasy viewership of conrents on

[he landinp page sesrricis anti rrl'lccis t l ~ cr i ~ l i t so r !he consumersdo view only

[lie conttiirs of their choice. It \\,as also sibrnitted that in order to allow the

dislributors ro srill earn ii-om ~11claililing p g r . restriction has been imposed only
 i3
13
on placemen[ of rxcd chani~cls; ~ n dno[ on placenicnt of' other channels and

materials which may incinde advertisements

12. In rejoindcr, both thc seniol. advoc;lres, Mr.Manindcr Singh and Mr.Arun

Kathpalia, have veliemen~lyconiesled all the factual and legal submissions

atlvanced on behalf of TlWI. According to Mr.Singh power for taking the

in;i;.;gned dciisioii czn hi. claiiiied by TIU: only through Rcgulatiilns.

According to him, this view is j~lsrihccl;!lso by a careful reading of Section 29

which provides penalty for viola~ions of the directions of the Authority.

According to him, the A~ithurityhas the ncccssary power to enforce cornpliancc

of Regulations.

13. Mr.Kathpalia has submitled by wily of rejoinder that broadcasting services

carulot include TIW and t o r improving the purity of T W , T M I can have only

an advisory role; i~lterconnection is different than placement; i r n p ~ c t of

i m p ~ ~ g n edccision
il on rcvcnue has no1 been asscssed and therefore, therc is nor1-

application of' mind; cunsLlmer inlci.t.sr is not afi'ected because now all [he

channels arc as per option o i thc viz\vcr and non-TI<P channels are stiil

permitled on lhe landing page. According to him, thz conclusions drawn in

various paras of EM L I I ~ L I S ~ o i n l LO show lransparency but ii1.e actually not ilic

-.

reasons for rhc i ~ n p ~ l g n edccision.

d Thz re:lsons cannot be real unless n study is

dara on [he extent the '1'RP are vitiated due

casrictl out so as to c o l i e c ~viil~~able
 to contents of landing page, their effect on thc broadcasters anti advertiserntnts

and the crkcl of control on landing pngc on the revenue of distributors

11. l'hc final submission of all the appellants is that contents of landing page

6.'
cnn at best amount ts sdvertisenients ~vhichis legally permissible anli there is no

appreciable and measureable injury on account of allcged distortion of TRP.

..
'!'he MSOsldist:.iSa:o:s :vould sulfc; a laigc and dispicpartiona:e injury by vvay

of loss of revenue ilnd the same has also not been measured. Lastly, it has been

submitted that evcr ii'it was proved that distortion in TRP is appreciable and

requires some rcinedial action, all the alternative options should have been

sought from spccialised agencies including BARC and then an informed

decision should have been talten in a transparent manner s o as to cause

minimum injury to thu stalceholders: particularly, the distributorslMS0s. It was

also stihmit!ed that BARC is an agency representing 60% broadcasters, 20%

a d v e ~ i s e r sand 20% advenising ngcncics and if BARC has any problems

relating to TRI', it shoultl be ullowctl to take initiative for remedies if the

problem is gen~rin~..It hils also been submitted that sincc BARC has not taken

any such initiative, it must be presu~nedthat cone of the stakeholders in BARC

are odvcrsely a f f t c ~ c d lo ;my material cstent and on this ground also the
-
irnpl~gnelidirections are arbitrary and unrcasonable.

1 Althai~gh.lplu'iics I1;1ve put reliancz iip,>n some jutlgmcnts, these will be

discusssci nil rel'crsccl olily whcil ncccssaiy for deciding the materinl issues.
 16. The most important and fi~nda~nentalissue is whether TR4I has

jurisdiction to issue Live impugncd directions under relevant provisions in

Srclion I l(l)('o), partic~llarly,cl:u~scs(ii) and (iii). For this issue, it is important

l i i i inennilig and co~lccptof interconnection hehveen the service

lo ~ ~ n d e r s ~ a Lhc
.,
j .
,
. .
providers in the iicld of broadcasting. As already noted, the word

" i ~ ~ ~ c r c o n ~ i c c t ihas
u n "no! been dcfined under the Act bul iot-tunateiy it has been

detinrd in the Rcgi~lations of 2017 and used at various places in the said

Rcgulations. A plain reading ol' thc definition in Regulation 2(s) c!early shows

that it refers to and rncans only those cornmercial and technical arrangements

which enable or au~horisas c r ~ , i c eproviders to connect their equipments and

nei\vorks lo provide brondcasling sclvices 10 the subscribers. In absence of such

commercial and technical arrangements, naturally, service providers will not

have the right and corresponding obligation untier which they can connect their

eqi~ipmcntsancl networks for lilt: purpose o f providing broacicasting services to

the subs crib el.^.

.l.o acliicve this rninirnu~n connectivity for providing
. .

broadcasting servicc to tlic subscribzrs gc!ierally a "carriage i'ce'' is payable by a

bro3dcas1er to ihe tiistriburor. This fee has been defiricd in llzgulation 2(m) in

..
-
'.cal.riage fee" rncans any fee payable by a broi~dcastcrlo u distributor

~ irzlevision
' channels only for the pilrposc of carrying its chamel,s

ilirough ihc distl-ibulor's networt;, without, spccilying the placen~~ent

 guide or, seeltir~gassign~nentoi'a panicular number to such channels;

17. Clearly, carriage Gee is a necessary commercial tern1 for interconnection

and it need not speciiji anything relating to placement of channels. Placement or

rerms and conditions for placemsnt arc no1 at all nuccssary for interconnection.

'This is also clear from Regulation 2Qj). This provision d e f i n c "Refercnce

Offer" or
I~~terconnect "RIO" io mean a document published by a service

provider specifying terms and conditions on which the other service providers

may seek interconnection wilh such service provider. The Rcgulalions contain

provisions under which a d i s ~ r i b ~ ~ist oobligcd

r to carry channels of a broadcaster

on fair and transparent terms and from definition of RIO it is again clear that

interconnection can be s o ~ ~ gby

h t way of right on RIO terms without there being
any condition for placement or a placenlent agreement between the patties

18. On a carefill rcatling of Paras 96 to 99 of the EM of Regulations of 2017,

il is h ~ ~ that
n d carriage and placemsnt have bcen treated diffircntiy. Carriage ..

fee has been dclincil to sccure intel.connec!ior~ \\~ithplacement provisions. It

alsu recognises ihc 'ILL thal therc: can be an ir~ttrcolu~cction

agreement. There is

nolliing to susgcst [hat ~il'tcr intcrconnrc:ior, has bccn achicved through

-..
interconnection ag~.t.ement or IilO, thcrc car1 not be a separare pl;icemsnt

rlgreement a1 any latcr point orlime.

19. The discussion in the EIM noted above and the provisions in the main

Regulgtions such as Rcgulntiorrs 3(3) anti 1 8 leave no manner of doubt that

placemet~tis a concept diffcrenr fiom interconnection. Under the Reguli~lions,

placement is permitted subjecl :o certain conditiotis without specifying any

conclition that ony partici~larchannel canno1 fintl placement on the landing pilge.

.fhere is merit in the s~hrnissiun odvanccd on behalf of appellants that

interconnection takes placc on accouiit of linalisation of carriage fee and this can

he totally difkrcnt from an agrecment Sol. placement. Thc word

"interconnection" cannot be riiltun as an ec)liivaleni of "placemenrM either in

litcrary sense or technically. 13otli are dii'fe:ent concepts and placement will

always ~ o l l o wintrrconnection. lhcre can be interconnection \vitliout placement

but ti~erccan be no placen~entwithout interconnection

2 0 . . In [he relevant sub-claitses (ii) 2nd (iii) of clousc (b) of Scction 1 l ( 1 ) of

the Act, ~llc:ref'ercnce ro interconncc~iviryincluding terms and conditions : h e r e d

as well as. technical cornpalibility and effectivcncss refcr purely to

interconncc~ivitywhich is dil'i'crcr~t lium placcmcnl, Terms and conditions for

inlerconnectivity can hc prescribed by ?'[<A1 urliler the aforesaid provisions of

tl:e Act but clcarly ~ h c :provisions \vliicli have been claimed ano are also
...

mentioned in thc impngned rlireciions 2s source of powel. and which hevo becn

~elictiupon by learncd counjcl hi.thc respondent, do not vest any power in t i e

' . f P d I tu iss~icdi:cctions for ihc p ~ ~ r p o sofc ounailing the right o f distributors to

 carry iiny channel on any page inclutling the landing page by way of content or

by way of adcrtiscmcnl. Such right is a valuable right to carry on trade and

business i b r protit and can bi. regulatcd or curtailed only for good reasons

through staturory provisions likc the Rcguiations. Sccrion I l(l)(b)(ii) vests

l':

power to issue tlirections only in respect of "interconnectivity" and not for

controlling contenls ol' I~indingpage for TRP purposes. For such a purposc there

is no powcr in T'11A1 to issue directions under the Act.

21. Hence. in our considered view, tht: impugned directions are beyond the

provisions of tile ,<ct which clnpower 'I'M1 to issue directions. Therefore, the

impugned directions nuur be sci aside on this point alone. W e order

22. Since the main point of' power or jurisdiction to issue the impugned

.- direction has been dcci~lcdagainst ihc rcspontlent, it is not necessary to decide

i
\' ,

other issues and hencc they are left open but in the interest of all the

stakehoideis irlti also i'or c~chicvinglhc objects and piirposc of thc Act, it is

deemed necessary to observe thal a so called valuable right of the ciistributors, if

proposed ro be curlailed shot~ld be interfered with only ai'ter seriously

considering all thz pros 2nd coils including the extent of injury likely to be
.

it' si~cll?I curb is not iinposeu or il' it is

sustained by different sinkclioldc~~s

imposcd. Thc relevant data oil the basis of study should Justitj. such a strong
23. Having said that distributors' rights may require a serious consideration of'

all [he pros and cons germnnc to the issuc, i L is worthwhile to no:e Illat the issue

of' landing page !nay Lhrow LIP conflicting interesls and rixhts because TiL'I

claims ro balance thern rnainly in lhe interest oTconsulners. Such rights can be

properly nncerstood and i-egula\ed only ~ v l ~ eitn is clearly understood as to

~ v l ~ o nlai~tling
i pagc bciongs to 34 an owrier and also as a beneficiary ot'the cnd

producl. Does it belong io the subscriber or to the DPO who brings the signals

to thc subscriber or lo iio~:co f ~ i l c s c ?To be fair, such n cluestion of law has been

canvassed ncither by appellants vihich include DPOs and Broadcasters, nor by

1'2.41 which clnirns to h;ii,c also actcd in the intercst of coilsumcrs.

I\ilr.Md~iinderSingh n1;lkes it clear that it bclo~lgsto the DPOs, who therefore

havc full r i y h ~ son ~vherro place on the landing pogc. 'TR41 has not applied its

mind to this basic qiiestion bu: has obliquely r e f w e d to :he suggcslion whether

landing page can be useti ibr subscriber related inlormation. Such a suggestion

has becn disrn~sseilon account of technical difficu-ties that the DPOs may face.
Wc do nor 1;~1ow such dil'fic~~l~ies
or ~vhe!her those difficulties are

insu~.inoun:ablc I lowcvcr, we do know [hat thr A~:thori[yhas applied sufficient

cncigj i i i ~ t i (!ilig21:2e i l l :i:ldr~ssi~.~g

t ~ c h i c e ~?robienis
i faced by 3AXC since

RAliC tlici no1 ivish to change its n:cthodology lkeeping in view tllc'inte~national

best pl-aci~ccs.No cine c n i ~ll:~ve cavil !vith ibllowing best praclices, liowcver,

we cio i:ot l<~!i>w\vIiiil ; I Y ~lhc best in~ernarionalpractices in respcct oi'lnniling

pagc or is re.;pcct of 1-eguiarion of' LCNs in gencral. W o ~ ~ litd not be a best

pr;lcLicc if suhscrihcr IS given a clioicc LO '.opt"'? Should ;lie landing page be a

~ C I ' L I U I L or a s<pal.olc p;12c i i ~ils o\\.li rigill? Can the subscriber he presented with

;I iiri;iult, be i; a ratetl or iinr.;itcd clianrici? Or, ;is Ivlr.Ivlanindc1- Singli suggests,

1t1csi~hscrihel.'~
risht is sul'licic~~tiy
covcrrd since !iiz 1I)PO determines the tariFf

for subscriber al'lcr a c i o ~ i n ~ i l roi

i g ircvc11iisgenerated ihrouyli rhc d c h u l t laliding

p ~ g ~ '01
?'
course. hi: q u c s ~ i o ~n l harici in:i!; hnvi 1ii;lny pcrspeciivcs: and tile

I . C ~ I I ~ ~ I Lis
I ) Snot obligzd to concci\:e o r ans\vcr all of it~ern. 'The observa:ion ~ v c

wish to makc is that \\,hen s~lbscribcr's intcrest is canvassed, i may be

24. l'hc Broodcasling Appz:~ls arc allowed in thc light of discussions and

rcesons noted >ibove. Ilowcver, thcrc shall bz no ordcr as to costs.

...................1 '
(S. K. ~ i k ~ J)h ,
Chairperson

..........................
(A.K. Llhi~rgava)
= Member
 I

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

21
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. --------OF 2019

[UNDER APPEAL UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE TELECOM

REGULATORY AL'THORITY OF INDIA ACT, 19971

IN THE MATTER OF:-

Position of the ~ a r t i e s

In TDSAT In t h s Court

I. BROADCASTING APPEAL NO. 2 OF 2018:-

1. Telecom Regulatory Respondent Appellant

Authority of India
Through its Authorized
Representative
Mahanagar Door Sanchar
Bhawan
Jawahar La1 Nehru Marg
(Old Minto Road)
New Delh 110 002

Versus

1 Bennett, Coleman & Co.

Ltd.,
Through its .quthorized
Representative
Having its Office at:
6'"Floor, Equinox Business Appellant Respondent
park No.1 No.1
Tower-I, Off BKC,
Ambedkar Nagar
Kurla (West), -.
..

Mumbai-400 070

2 Zoom Entertainment
Network Ltd.,
Througl~ its Authorized
Representative
Having its Office at:
GIh Floor, Equinox Business AppeIlant Respondent
park No.2 No.2
Tower-I, Off BICC,
Ambedkar Nagar
Kurla (West!,
hlunlbai-400 070
 .
22
11. BROADCASTING APPEAL NO. 4 OF 2018:-

1 Teleconl Regulatory Respondent Appellant

Authority of India
Throi~gh its .Authorized
Representative
Mahanagar Door Sanchar
Bhawan
Jawahar La1 Nehru Marg
(Old Minto Road)
New Delhi 110 002
Versus

1 All India Digital Cable

Federation
Through its .Authorized
Representative
A Company registered
under the Indian Appellant Respondent
Companies Act, 2013
AT : 236, Okhla Industrial
Estate, Phase 3,
New Delhi-110 020

111 BROADCASTING APPEAL NO. 1 OF 20 19:-

1. Telecom Regulatory Respondent .Appellant

Authority of India
Tlu-ough its .Authorized
Representative
Mahanagar Door Sanchar
Bhawan
Jawahar La1 Nehru Marg
(Old Minto Road)
New Delhi 110 002
Versus
-

1 JPR Channel, Mumbai

Through its Authorized
Representative
Having office at:
204/2015, 2"" Floor, Appellant Respondent
Nirmal Industrial Estate
Near Dalda Company (WF)
Sion, Mumbai
Maharashtra -- 400022
 -APPEAL UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE TELECOM
REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA ACT, 1997

To,
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE O F INDIA
AND HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE
HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.

THE HUMBLE APPEAL OF THE

APPELLANT ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. The present Appeal arises out of and against the Impugned

final Common Order dated 29.05.2019 passed by the

Hon'ble Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal,

New Delhi in Broadcasting Appeal No. 2 of 2018,

Broadcasting Appeal No. 4 of 2018 & Broadcasting Appeal

No. 1 of 2019, wherein the Hon'ble TDSAT was pleased to

allow the said Appeals and set aside the direction dated
I'

03.12.2018 issued by the Appellant Authority.

2. QUESTIONS OF LAW: -

The Appellant respectfully subinits that the present Appeal raises

the following substantial questions of law for consideration of this

..-
Hon'ble Court: -

A. Whether placement of a channel of a broadcaster by the

distributor on the landing page of a subscriber is

"interconnection" and w i t h n the power of TR41 to

regulate in terms of section 1l(l)(b)(ii)',(iii) & (iv) of the

TRAI Act, 1997?

 B. Whether placement of channel involves "interconnection"

between two service providers viz. broadcaster and

distributor?

C. Whether it is beyond the power and purview of TRAI to

regulate placement of a channel?

D. Whether TRAI has the power to issue directions to the

stakeholders, in exercise of section 13 of the TRAI Act,
1997 with regard to placement of channel?

E. Whether on the issue relating to placement of channel a

direction could never be issued and the same is required

to be done only by way of an Regulation?

F. Whether the Appellant Authority has the jurisdiction to

issue direction dated 03.1 2.2018 under relevant

provisions in Section 1 l ( l ) ( b ) particularly,

, clauses (ii) and
- (iii) of the TRAI Act, 1997?

G. Whether the tern1 'interconnection' under the T M Act,

1997 warrants a wide interpretation?

..
H. Whether the word "inter.connectionn encompasses within
its scope all issues w h c h may termed as marketing fee,
channel visibility fee and placement of channels?

3. BRIEF FACTS:

The brief facts giving rise to the present Appeal are as

follows:-
I. The ,Appellant .4uthority, the Telecom Regulatory

,Authority of India was established under Sub-section

(1) of Sec.3 of the Telecom liegulatory Authority of

India Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as ' TRAI Act')

and has been entrusted to discharge certain functions,

which inter-alia, include regulation of

Telecommunicatioi~Services; fixing the terms and

conditions of interconnectivity between service

providers; ensure technical compatibility and effective

interconnection between the service providers; layng

down of standards of quality of service to be provided

by service providers and to ensure the quality of

service and conducting periodical survey of such

service provided by service providers so as to protect

the interests of the consumers of Telecommunication

service.

11. The Ministry of Communication and Information

Technology (Department of Telecommunications),

vide its Notification No. 39 --

-

(a)issued in exercise of powers conferred upon the

Central Government proviso to clause (k) of sub-
section (1)of Section 2 of the TRAI Act, 1997 and

(b)published under notification number S.0.44(E)

dated the 09.01.2004 in the Gazette of India,
Extraordinary, Part 11, Section 3 - sub-section (ii)
 has notified broadcasting services and cable services

to be telecommunication services;

111. The TRAI Act, 1997 entrusts the Appellant Authority,

amongst others, the function to ensure technical

compatibility and effective interconnection between

different service providers, fix terms and conditions of

interconnection and maintain register of Interconnect.

The first interconnection regulation for broadcasting

sector namely the 'Telecommunication (Br.oadcasting

and Cable S e ~ v i c e s 117terconnection

) Regulation, 2004'

was notified by the .Appellant Authority on 10.12.2004

(hereinafter referred as 'Interconnection Regulations,

2004'). These were notified to regulate interconnection

arrangements between service providers of

broadcasting and cabIe services for re-transmission of

signals in analogue mode, in vogue at that time. From

time to time, need arose to clarify, as well as to expand

the scope of the Interconnection Regulations, 2004 to

include addressable platforms such as Direct to Home

(DTH), Head-end In The Sky (HITS), fnternet Protocol

Television (IPTV),etc.

IV. The analogue cable TV systems had inherent

Iimitations such as limited channel carrying capacity.,

limited choice to the consumers and non-addressable

nature of the network. The evolution of technology

paved way for bringing about digitization with

 P'

addressability in the cable T\! sector. Accordingly,

21
after studying the subject at length and undertaking a

public consultation process, the Authority, on SLh

August 2010, gave its recommendations on

implementation of Digital Addressable Cable TV

Systems ("DAS") across the country along with a

roadmap to achleve the same. DAS has multiple

advai~tagesover the analogue system. It addresses the

issues of capacity constraints for distributor, provides

consumers more choice of channels and better quality

of viewing etc. The Government issued notification

dated 11"' No\ieinber, 2011, which laid down the

roadmap for impleinentation of digitization in cable

television section in four phases starting from June

2012. The Appellant A ~ ~ t h o r i t ynotified the

Telecomn~unication(Broadcasting and Cable Sewices)

Interconnection (Digital Addressable Cable Television

Systems) Regulations, 2012 on 30Ih April, 2012

(hereinafter referred to as 'Interconnection

Regulations, 201 2').

-..

Copy of the said Regulations, 2012 is Annexed hereto

and marked as Annexure P-1.

Digitization in the cable sector was implemented in

four phases and it has been coinpleted all over the

country by 31" lvlarch 2017. This enjoined the

Appellant Authority to work on a common

Interconnection framework. Subsequently, after due

consultative process the Appellant Authority notified,

The Telecon~munication (Broadcasting and Cable)

Services Interconnection (Addressable Systems)

Regulations, 2017 on 3 ' W a r c h 2017 (hereinafter

referred as the Interconnection Regulations, 2017).

The relevant provisions of the Interconnection

Regulations, 201 7 are reproduced as below:

"Reg. 2jh) "broadcaster" means a person or a

group of persons, or body corporate, or a n y
organization or body who, after having
obtained, in its name, downlinking permission
for its channels, from the Central Government,
is providing programming services;

Reg. 2 0) "broadcasting services" means the

dissen~inationof a n y form of comn7unication
like signs, signals, writing, pictures, images
and sounds of all kinds b y transmission of
electro-magnetic waves through space or
through cables intended to be received b y the
general public either directly or indirectly and
all its gramrnatical variations and cognate
expressions shall be construedaccordingly;

Reg. 2 (m) "carriage fee" means a n y fee

payable b y a broadcaster to a distributor o f
television channels only for the purpose o f
carrying its clIannels through the distributor's
network, without, specifying the placement o f
such channels onto a specific position in the
electr,onic programme guide or, seeking
 I
assignment of a particular number to such
channels:

Reg. 2 (t) "electronic programme guide" or

'FPG"m e a ~ as program guide maintained b y
the distributors o f television channels that lists
television channels and programmes, and
scI~eduling and programming information
therein and includes a n y enhanced guide that
a1lol.v~subscribers to navigate and select such
available channels a r d programmes;

Reg. 2 (x) "inteirconnection" means commercial

and recl~nical arrangements under which
service providers connect their equipments
and networks to provide broadcasting services
to the subscribers;

Reg. 2 Ciji "reference interconnection offer" or

"RIO" means a d o c u n ~ e n t published b y a
service provider- specifying terms and
conditions on which the other service provider
m a y seek interconnection with such service
provider;

Reg. 3.13) I f a broadcaster, proposes or

stipulates for, directly or indirgctly, placing the
channel in a n y specified position in the
electronic progrsamme guide or assigning a
particular, channel number, a s a pre-condition
for providing signals, such pre-condition shall
also amount to imposition of unreasonable
condition.

Reg. 18. Listing c f channels in electronic

programme guide.-
( 1 ) Every broadcaster shall declare the genre
of its channels and such genre shall be either
'Devotional' or- 'General Entertainment' or
'Infotain177ent'or 'Kids'or 'Movies'or 'Music' or
'News and Current Affairs' or 'Sports' or
'Miscellaneous'.

(2)It shall be mandatory for the distributorf to

place channels in the electronic programnle
guide, In such a w a y that the television
channels o f same genre, a s declared by the
broadcasters, are placed togethel-
consecutively and one channel shall appear at
one place only:

Provided that all television channels o f same

language within the same genre shall appear
together consecutively in the electronic
programme guide:

Provided further that it shall be permissible to

the distributor to place a channel under sub-
genre within the genre declared for the
channel by the broadcaster.

(3) Every distributor o f television channels

shall assign a unique channel number for each
television channel available on the distribution
network.

(4) The channel number once assigned to a

pafliclrlar television channel shall not be
alrerecl by the distributov for a per~od o f at
least one year f r o n ~ the date o f such
assignment:
 Provided that this sub-regulation shall not
apply in case the channel becomes unavailable
or7 the distribution network:

Provided further that if a broadcaster changes

the genre of a channel then the channel
number assigned to that pai-ticular television
channel shall be changed to place such
channel together with the channels of new
genre in the electronic program guide."

Copy of the said Interconnection Regulations, 2017 is

Annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P-2 %

7-7-11 0)
V. One of the prime benefit of the digitization is the

ability and the control of the subscribers in choosing

the channels. In the digital addressable systems, the

technolog)- provides for Electronic Program Guicle

(EPG) wherein the chanr,els being carried on

distributor's net\vorl<can be tabulated in a simple easy

to understand manner so that a subscriber can easily

go through this guide and select the channel of h s

choice instead of flipping through all the channels. A

typical digital acldressable system provides set-top-

box along with a remote to enable subscriber to select

a channel. Electronic Programming Guide (EPG)

provides list of channels available in the distribution

network enabling the subscribers to choose desired

television channel through a menu. The menu

 . 32
categorizes the channels into various
categories/genres. The distributor arranges all
channels available in its network in a Logical Channel

Number (LCN) typically in the range from 000 to 999.

The custonler convenience lies in the way the channels

are grouped together among various genres.

VI. While the EPG provides convenience of selection to the

customers, it also provides an opportunity to the

distributors who may position the channels at LCN
numbers giving better visibility to ensure hlgher

uptake/ selection by customers. Thls feature enables

distributors to bargain some additional benefits from

the broadcasters to place a channel at a LCN that

attracts more eye-balls.

VII. Sometimes, this facility of placing a channel by

distributor results in some discriminatory practices by

placing a channel in a disadvantageous position. For

Examplc - Placing a News channel among the group of

de\lotional channels. Considering these issues, the

-
Appellant Authority in Telecomn?unication

(Broadcasting and Cable Se~vices) Interconnection

(Digital Addressable Cable Television Systems)

Regulations, 201 2 (herein after Interconnection

Kegulation 2012), inter-ctlia, mandated that every

broadcaster shall declare the genre of its channels and

that the Multi System Operator ("IvlSO") shall place

 v

channels in the respective genre declared by the

33
broadcaster. It also mandated that one channel shall

appear in only one genre. Similar provisions were also

suitably incorporated in the Subsequent

Interconnection Regulations, 2017 under Regulation

VIII. Such provisions are not part of the Telecommunication

(Bvoadcasting and Cable Sewices) Intevconnection

Regulation 2004 dated l o t h December, 2004 (herein

after referred to as "Interconnection Regulation 2004")

w h c h was initially applicable for non-addressable

cable TV systems, and was later amended to include

addressable systems sucli as DTH, HITS, and IPTV.

IX. Complaints were received by the Appellant Authority

froin stakeholders regarding placing of telexision

channels on multiple LCNs allegedly for influencing

television ratings. Actions were taken on such service

providers as per the extant provisions of the

regulations.
-

X. The tele\!ision ratings in India are published under the

'Policy Guidelines fov TeIevision Rating Agencies in

India' issued by the Ministry of Information and

Broadcasting ("MIB") on 16.31.2014, and the said

guideIines were form~ilated based on

recommendations of the Appellant Authority. The

Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) is a

 registered agency under the above said guidelines that

provides Televisioil Ratings i the country. The

underlying spirit of policy guidelines for television

rating in India is to have accurate, credible,

transparent and representative TV audience

measurement. t present, the BARC is the only
registered agency under these guidelines that provides

Television Ratings in the country. As per the said

guidelines the agency shall also be governed by the

provisions of TRAI Act, 1997. Clause 7 of the said

guidelines specifies that the data generated by the

rating agency is inade available, on paid basis, to all
interested stakeholders in a transparent and equitable
manner.

I In order to provide Television Ratings, the BARC

employs the Audience measurement Methodology,

under wl~icha unique watermarked code is embedded

in the audio coinponent of the channel. This code

consists of the Channel ID & the time stamp. BAR-O-
Meters installed at panel household's premises

captures the watermark of the TV channel when such

channel is being viewed by the panel household.

The audience measurement is carried out through

panel homes which are drawn from the pool of

households selected through an establishment survey.
The selection of panel homes, from the household
 -

pool created through establishment survey, are based

on distribution of target viewership for a particular

segment like age group, socio-economic class, gender,

working status, multiple delivery platforms, all States

ancl urban & rural markets. .4s per the BARC's website

the methodology of audience measurement, the

ratings are measured in the following manner:-

Data collected from the meters is in seconds.

However, in keeping with international standards,
all validations rules are on viewing sessions (blocks
of time o f n / S e t on in the H t l - Tuning; and of each
ii~dlvidualviewing 7%' - Viewing) and reported data
is i17 clock minutes. Hence, all data needs to be
converted to clocli minutes (i.e. HH:MM format, e.g.
12:00:00 to 12:01:00, 12:01:00 to 12:02.00 and so
on).

Individual Viewing Sessions within a clock minute:

For BAR-0-Meter measured TV sets there are rules
applied to the events that attribute viewing to one
and only one TVchannel for a n entire clock minute.
Only one channel is eligible to receive viewing credit
for each clock minute throughout the viewing day. I f
a n individual is viewing a TL'channel for 3 0 seconds
or more in a clock minute, the rules are
straightforward and viewing is attributed to that
channel for the entire clock minute.

The rules become more complex when viewing

d~rringa clock minute i17volvesmultiple channels for
n total o f 3 0 or more seconds. Additional rules are
required as described below for processing event
da ta.
 Channel Viewing Sessions within a clock minute:
36
Individuals can view multiple channels within a
single clock minute. However, only one channel will
be assigned the viewing in each clock minute. To
assign this viewing, the following rules are applied.

Rule 1 - Only one channel watched: The viewing for

the entire clock minute gets attributed to that
channel.

Rule 2 - Multiple channels watched with different

viewing durations: Viewing is attributed to the
channel with the maximum viewing duration.

Rule 3 -Multiple cl~annelswatched with two or more

channels having the same maximum viewing
duration: There are two scenarios for this rule -

Scenario 3a - One o f the cl~annels with the

maximum viewing duration moves into the next
. - clock minute. In this case, viewing is attributed to the
channel moving into the next clock minute.

Scenario 3b - None o f the cl~annels with the

n ~ a x i m u mviewing duration moves into the next
clock minute. In this case, viewing is-attributed to a
random channel fi-on1 arnong those channels having
the m a x i m u n ~viewil~gduration, using a rand0111
allotment algorithm. It is pertinent to note that the
3 0 seconds or more rule, wherever applied, refers to
a total of 30 seconds in a clock minute - whether
consecutive or not The pre-processed minute level
data is then subjected to further processing with
s o f t w a ~ ~ ethat performs data validation and
weighing.
 C

XI. Therefore, as per the audience measurement of BARC,

viewing of a TV channel is calculated on the clock

minute basis. Further, a channel with a maxi~num

viewing duration in a clock minute gets the entire

viewing attribute for that minute. If a channel is placed
at a landing page, whenever customer switches ON the
Set Top Box ("STB"), it displays the landing page

containing the channel first for a predefined duration.

l'he predefined duration is generally configurable and

during this period remote do not allow subscriber to

flip channels. This time period attains criticality and

may influence television rating. It may happen
multiple tiines as and when customer switches ON the
STB in a day. After the STB is switched ON, landing

channel continues to run on bacl<ground, customer

bro\\ises the menu options which consumes some

time.

Further there is a very high probability that the

customer is not viewing such channel as her/his
-..
natural preference. Such additional and non-genuine

viewership ma)' give the channel an upper hand in the

rating recorded by the audience measurement.

Therefore, the Appellant Authority was of the opinion

that the placing of channels on landing page may be a
powerful tool which could lead to influencing and
artificially inflating the ratings of a TV channel.
XIII. The practice of running a channel on multiple LCNs

allegedly for influencing television rating was brought

to the notice of the Authority. This was allegedly done

by some broadcasters in collusion with the

distributors, who placed some television channels on

multiple LCNs. As the TV channel ratings

measurement is done on the basis of unique water

mark 1D of a channel, the data of viewership of all such

multiple LCNs is aggregated and reflects in final

ratings. It is obvious that a channel available on more

LCNs will have higher probability of viewerslup. On

receipt of complaints, the Appellant Authority

intervened and acted as per the provisions of the

extent regulations.

XIV. However, this practice was later shifted to landing

page and the Appellant Authority received quite a few

complaints regarding the same. In industry parlance,

the landing channel or the landing page refers to the

Logical Channel Number (LCN) wlzich is displayed first

when the Set Top Box (STB)is switched on. It has been

reported that the practice of placing a registered

satellite TV channel having watermark ID on the

land~ngpage has the potential to affect the viewershp

data of that channel. Therefore, it influences the

televisioil audience . measurements and television

ratings. This landing page issue also drew attention of

the MIB ancl the Parliament as well. The MIB issued a

 let1 er clated 24.liS.201 7
3 q
to BAKC to stop giving rating

to sucli chaimels which are not adhering to the

Regulatiol~s of the Appellant .Authority. I11 tl-Lis

connccrion, the MIB also fonvarcled complaint letters

it receir-ed from \:arious stakeholders

Tl-Lis issue was also raisecl before the Lok Sabha

d u ~ . i n g the Monsoon Session, 2017. After clue

coilsicleratio~lancl deliberation with stal<eholde.rs,the

Authoi-it!, issued a direction dated 8'"November, 2017

wherein it was directed that all the broadcasters and

distributors of television c l ~ a n i ~ e l to
s , 1-estraiil from

placing any registered satellite televisio~l ch~ul~nel,

wihose TV rating is released b y T\l rating agent!', on

the lancliilg LCN or landing chailnel or boot u p screeil.

Copy of the directioil dated 08.1 1.2017 is Ailllexed

hereto ancl marl<ed as Annexure P-3'

XI'.. hIeanruhile, in pursuance of the above-referred

challeilge and submissions to Hon'ble TDSAT, the

Appellant Authority issued a Coilsultatioll Paper on

"Issues reelaleil t o Placing of Telrvision Channel 017

Lauding l'age" oil the 03.04.2018 seel<ing

of all the stakeholders with an

coi~~ments/suggcstions

objeclive to initiate coml~rehei~sivc

consultations on

all issues relating to landing page with a n aim to

 prolec:t the i ~ ~ t e r 01'
e s the
~ consuiners and fair gl.owth

of the sector.

Cop) oi' rile said Consulta~ionPaper dated 03.04.2018

is ai~neseclhereto and inarked as Annexure P-4.

XVI. The said direction dated 08.1 1.2017 was challenged by

soine I\ISOs and a ilews broadcaster in the Hon'ble

Telecoin Disputes Svttleinent and Appellate Tribunal

(TDSAT). The petitioners therein contended the saicl

direction, inter-aiin, primarilj~ on the grouilds of

transparency. Dul.ing hearil~g before the IHon'bIe

TDSAT, tbe Appellant Autho~:ity/TRAI conve)~ecl.irs

intention to recoilsider the issue in totality. Pursuant

to which, the Appellant Authority, vide its direction

dated 25.04.2018, repealed the direction dated

08.1 1.201 7 with i~lllnediateeffect, after obt:aining the

per~llissioilof [.he FIon'ble TDSAT.

Copy of the dii-ectioil clated 25.04.2018 is Annexed

hereto and nial-l<ed as Aililesure P-5.

I . The Appellant Authority received 25 coninlents and 2

counrer-comments froin the stakeholders in response

to tlic aforesaid consultatioi? paper dated the

03.04.2018. The Appellant Authority also conducted

an ope11 house discussion (OHD) with the stalieholders

on the 28.05.20LS.
 X\J?II. The Appellant Authority analyzed tlie commkhts,

counter-coinments from the stakeholders and also tlie

data obtained from distributors and Broadcast

Audience Research Council (BARC) and it emerged

therefrom that placing of a channel on landing page

iilfluences the Tele\lsion Rating Points (TRP). Due to

aforesaid influence on TRP, placing of any TIJ channel,

for which TV ratings are released by registered rating

agency (hereinafter referred to as 'rated TV channel'),

on landing LCN, it was observed that it provides a

distinct advantage to such channel in the measured

viewing sessions and that such additional viewership

is due to appearance of a cliannel as a result of the

default placement done by the distributor, thereby

resulting in nor-level playing field anlong

broadcasters.

XIX, Keeping in view that the very purpose of the policy

guidelines for television ratings in India is to have a

credible, transparent and representative television

I
~.
-
audience measurement system, the Appellant

Authority was of the opinion that placing a rated TV

channel on landing LCN impedes the credibility of the

ratings released by the agency.

XX. Therefore, keeping in ~ i e wthat thc landing LCN is not

a natural choice of the viewer, thereby causing undue

distortion, the Appellant Authority was of the

 considered \lieu that the rating of TV channels should

be free from any distortion, as such artific~alinfluence

on TV ratings negates its sanctity.

I . Therefore, the Appellant Authority, in exercise of the

powers conferred upon it under section 13, read with

sub-clause (ii) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section

11, of the TR.41 .4ct, 1997 (24 of 1997),in order to

protect the interest of service providers and

consumers and ensure orderly growth of the sector,

vide its direction dated 03.12.2018, directed all

broadcasters and distributors of the television

channels to restrain from placing any registered

satellite television channel, whose TV rating is released

by 'TVrating agency, on the landing LCN or landing

channel or the boot-up screen with immediate effect.

Furthermore, the Appellant Authority directed that,

in case of previously entered agreements, efforts inay

be made to inlplelnent the clirections as soon as

-
possible and to implement the said directions in all

cases by 3 1.03.2019,and that, the illformation of such

pre-existing agreements with full details of the parries

to the agreement, the territory, agreement period and
other relevant details be submitted to the .4ppellant

Authority within seven days from the date of issuance

of Impugned Direction at an email address nlentioned

 therein. Copy of the said direction dated 03.12.2018 is

annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P-6

I 1 Being aggrieved, by the direction dated 03.12.2018

issued by the Appellant Authority, Respondent No. 1

& 2 being Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd., and Zoom

Entertainment Network Ltd., respectively, filed

Broadcasting Appeal No.2 of 2018, challenging the

said direction before Hon'ble TDSAT in December,

2018 seeking the following reliefs :-

"(a) Pass a n order quashing and setting aside the

Direction dated 03.1 2.201 8 purportedly issued in
exercise of Section 13 o f the TR.41 Act, 1997 read
with Section 11 (l)(D)(ii)o f the TR.41 Act, 1 9 9 7 to
the Appellant; and/or

(b) Pass such other order or direction as the court m a y

deem fit in the interest of justice. It is prayed
accordingly. "

Copy of the said Broadcasting Appeal No.2 of 2018 is

annexed hereto ancl marked as Annexure P-7

XXIII. Similarly, Broadcasting Appeals, being Broadcasting

Appeal No.4 of 2018 & Broadcasting Appeal No.1 of

2019 impugning the direction dated 03.12.2018 issued

by the Appellant Authority were challenged by the

Respondents, i.e., All India Digital Cable Federation &
0 -1

JPR Channel, hfumbai, respectively, seelung the

following reliefs :-

Broadcasting Appeal No.4 of 2018 :-

"(i)Pass a n order striking down the Impugned Direction

dated 3rd December, 2018, bearing n u m b e r 12-
37/2017-B&CS a s ultra \)ires and illegal.

(ii) An)) other/furtl~ei-orders or reliefs as the Hon'ble

Tribunal m a y deem fit in the interest o f justice. "

Broadcasting Appeal No.1 of 2019 :-

"(i) Pass a n order setring aside and quashing the

Impugned Direction dated 3rd December, 2018,
bearing number 12-37/2017-B&CS as ultra vires
and illegal;

(ii) A n y other/f~irtherorders or reliefs as the Hon'ble

Tribunal m a y deem fit in the interest ofjustice."

XxIv By its Impugnecl Judgment and Order dated

29.05.2019, the Hon'ble TDSAT was pleased to allow

the said appeals and to set-aside the direction dated

.. -

03.12.2018 issued by the Appellant Authority, while

holding the same as be)~onclthe provisions of the TRAI

Act, 1997 w h c h empower the Appellant Authority to

issue directions.
 'P

XXV. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is filing the present

Statutory Civil Appeal under Section 18 of the TRAI

Act, 1997.

4. GROUNDS:

A. For that, as per the preamble of TRAI Act, 1997, the

Appellant Authority is empowered to regulate the

telecommunication services. The Authority is constituted

to protect the interests of service providers and

consumers of the relecom sector and also to promote and

ensure orderly growth of the sector. The broadcasting

and cable services were made part of the

telecommunicatioi~services under section 2(l)(k)of TRAI

Act, vide notification dated 09.01.2004. As such, all the

provisions of TIWI Act became applicable to ' t h e

broadcasting and cable services.

The Appellant Authority regulates 'broadcasting

services'. Upon a bare perusal of 2ji) of

Interconnection Regulations, 2017, which defines

'broadcasting services', it is evident that, i t involves

provisioning of signals from the broadcaster to the

end-user in a seanlless manner and other aspects

incidental to i t and for the purposes of a seamless and

smooth transition, i t is necessary that the relationslzip

between broadcasters, distributors of television

channels and customers is regulated.

 -

B. For that 'interconnection' between the service providers

is the most crucial aspect to provide 'broadcasting

services'. In fact, clause 5.4 of Downlinking Guidelines

mandates that, a broadcaster can only transmit signals to

end-consumers through a distributor of television

channels. Thus, 'interconnection' becomes the most
essential component for provisioning of 'broadcasting
services'.

C. For that provisioning of 'broaclcasting services' involves

usage of airwaves and is a licensed and regulated activity.

The licenses are issued to broadcasters and DTH

- operators by Ministry of Information & road cast in^ and
the inter-relationship between broadcasters, distributors
of television channels and consumers is regulated by the

Appellant. Usage of airwaves, a scarce resource, meails

- that, 'broadcasting services' have to be carried out in a

manner ~vhicliensures maximum good.

D. For that by not defining 'interconnection' in TRAI Act,

-
Parliament has intended that 'interconnection' be given
the widest interpretation. PertinentIy, the provisions of

TRAI Act have to be \;ie~.;eclin light of protection of the

interests of both the ser\jice providers and consumers.

E. For that this Hon'ble Court in the case of Delh Science

Forum vs. Union of India - (1996) 2 SCC 405, has held :-
 " 29 . . . Section 1 1 opens with a non obstante clause
sayir~gthat notwithstar7ding anything contained in
the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the functions of the
Author-ity shall be as specified in the said section
including to ensure technical compatibility and
effective interrelationship between different sewice
providers, to ensure compliance o f licence conditions
by all service providers, to [acilitate competition and
promoie efficiency in the operation of
services, to protect the interest o f
telecomm~~r7ication
the consumevs o f the telecommunication services, to
levy fees a t such rates and in respect o f such services
as m a y be deter~xinedb y regulations."

F. For that the Hon'ble TDS.AT failed to consider that the

terms interconnection and interconnection agreements

have been defined in regulation 2(x) and 2(y) of

Interconnection Regulations, 2017, respectively, as

under:
. .
"Interconnectior7" means commercial and technical
arrangements under which service providers
connect their equipments and networks to provide
broadcasting services to the subscribers;

"interconnection agreement" with all its

gramn7a tical variations and cognate expressiorls
means agreements on interconnection providing
technical and comn7erciaI teifms and conditions for
distribution of signals of television channel;

G. For that the Hon'ble TDSAT failed to appreciate that the

placement of channels viz. of same genre or of same

language or on the landing channel / LCN - are all

 involving interconnectivity between two service providers

i.e.. broadcaster and distributor of TV channels.

H. For that, in addition to the non obstante clause in

beginning to section 11(1),the Parliament has introduced

a second non obstante clause in section 1l(l)(b)(ii)which

reads as under:-

" (ii)notwithstanding anything contained in the

terms and conditions of the licence granted before
the commencement of the Telecom Regulatory
Authority o f India (Amendment) Act, 2000, fix the
terms and conditions of inter-connectivity between
the service providers;"

The regulator should thus be well equipped to keep

pace with the emerging technologies, which have

beneficial to the consumers and other stakeholders. I11

case placement of channels is held not to involve

interconnectivity, the interconnecrion is likely to lack

behind which may inhlbit the optimum utilization of

emerging efficienr rechnologies, denying the benefit of

this to end users, viz., subscribers / consumers as well as

-~

adversely impact growth of broadcasting sector.

I. For that the Regulation 18(1)91 ( 2 ) itself indicates how a

channel is to be placed. These provisions mandate that

broadcasters shall declare genre of their channel and

MSOs shall place them in the respective genre.

J. For that the Hon'ble TDSAT erred in holding that sihce a

landing page agreement is sometime subsequent to

interconnection agreement and hence could not be

termed as an interconnection. Simply because in some

cases a placement agreement is separately executed

subsequent to the interconnection agreement, it could

not be held that placement is not interconnection.

K. For that the Hon'ble TDSAT failed to consider Paras 96 to

101 of the Explanatory Memorandum to the Regulation,

2017, wlucl~ specifically deals with the issue of

"placement". Para 100 of the Explanatory Memorandum

to the Regulation, 2017 categorically provides that any

commercial arrangement, which may be given varied

terms / names shall be treated as a type of

interconnection agreement. The said para reads inter alia

as under:-

" It is noted that in the comments 1,eceived from the

stakeholders and the agreements entered b y service
providers, varfied terms like marketing fee,
bandwidth support fee, channel visibility
-.
fee etc. are
used for different purposes and commercial
arrangements between broodcasters and DPOs. A n y
such commercial arrangement a type of
is
interconnection agreement and thel-efore it has to be
on non-discriminatoiy basis.. . "

L. For that the Hon'ble TDSAT had further failed to

appreciate that the placement of channels have been

previously adequately regulated whereby necessary
 P
50
protection has been granted to the broadcaster so that

their channels are not placed at any disadvantageous for

position in the Electronic Programme Guide (EPG) - as

recorded in para 98 of the Explanatory Memorandum to

Regulation, 2017. However, in view of the Impugned

Judgment, the Appellant Authority ~ i o u l dnot be in a

position to regulate placement of channel, at all

M. For that the Hon'ble TDSAT further erred in holding that

a direction could not be issued with regard to issue

relating to placement and that the same could be done

only through statutory provisions like the Regulations. In

this regard, it is respectfully submitted that sectioil 13 of

the TRAI Act, 1997 empowers TRAI to issue such

directioils from tiine to time to the s e r ~ l c eproviders, as

it may considerecl necessary for the discharge of its

functions under section 1.1(1). Thus the power of the

. -
TRAI to issue directions is independent and wide.

N. For that Section 1l(l)(b)(ii)and (iii) of TRAI Act deals with

'interconnection' in the widest possible manner. For the

..-
purpose of Section 1l(l)(b)(ii)of TRAI Act, each and every

aspect which facilitates iilterconnectivity is covered and

not just technical, commercial or techno-commercial

aspects. In other words, for the sake of smooth and

seamless transmission, all activities which are clone to

take signals to the end-consun~ersis 'interconnection',

 - 51
and hence, i t is not confined to te'chnical, commercial or

techno-commercial arrangements only.

0. For that Section 2(x) of Interconnection Regulations,

2017, which exhaustively defines 'interconnection',

provides that, 'interconnection' means commercial and

technical arrangements under which service providers

connect their ecluipments and networks to provide

broadcasting services to the subscribers. It follows as a

logical corollary that, placements agreements and landing

page agreements involve 'interconnection' and they are

'interconnection agreements'.

P. For that Hon'ble TDSAT while passing Impugned Order,

has failed to appreciate this Hon'ble Court's judgment in

Star India Private Limited v. Department o f Industrial

Policy & Promotion & Ors., (2019) 2 SCC 104. In fact, in the

said judgment, after examining the scope of the

Appellant's powers in regulating 'broadcasting services'

under TRAI Act and in framing Interconnection

-
Regulations, 2017 and the allied Tariff Order of 201 7, this

Hon'ble Court went on to hold that, the Appellant

exercises its powers in public interest and balances the

rights between the stakeholders and consumers.

Q. For that in a placement agreement or a landing page

agreement, the parties enter into a commercial

arrangement. The distributor of television channels also

 .v
52
agrees to carry out technical changes for that particular

channel in its system to be placed in a particular manner.

Such activities ensure that, the said channel is provided

for the consumption of the end-subscriber in that

particular manner which has been agreed upon.

R. For that the nature of arrangeinent arrived at should

determine whether it is 'interconnection' or not. The

timing of the agreement should not determine whether

that particular agreement entered is 'interconnection' or

not. In other words, whether the agreement was entered

prior or after or as a part of the initial 'interconnection

agreement' is not a deterillining factor. Thus, whether a

placement agreement or a landing page agreement is

entered into after the 'interconnection' is achleved is

inconsequential, because, any modification, variance,

amendment, novation or any other subsequeilt

arrangement involving coinmercial and technical terms

for provisioni~~g
of channels would also amount to an

'interconnection agreement'. In case such conlmercial

..
-~
agreements/arrangements are kept outside the purview

of definition of interconnection , the very purpose of

regulation of interconnection as provided for in the TRAI

Act would have no meaning.

S. For that Interconnection Regulations, 2017 and the allied.

quality of service regulations of 2017 deal with

'placement' of channels to avoid discrimination. In fact,

 . 53
regulation 18 of Interconnection Regulations, 201 7 deals

with declaration of genre. 'Placement' of channels is

permitted bvithin the bounds of regulatioils 18(1) and

18(2)of Interconnection Regulations, 2017

T. For that regulation 3(3) of Interconnection Regulations,

2017 mandates that, placement of a channel in a

particular manner shall not be a conditioii precedent for

agrfemeiits with distributors of televisioii channels.

U. For that in a digitised era, where the consumer chooses

his channel, the issue of placiiig of channels will lose

significance. Hence, the Appellant has not prescribed ally

'placement fee'. However, if a broadcaster still wishes to

enter into a specific arrangement for placement, then, it

can do so, subject to complying with explanation to

regulation 3(3) of Interconnection Regulations, 2017 and

- ensuring non-discrimination.

V. For that the Hoii'ble TDSAT has failed to appreciate the

thrust of paras. 96-101 of Esplanatory Memorandum to

Intercoiinection Regulations, 201 7 i.e., 'interconnection'

calls for the widest interpretation. In t h s regard, paras.

100 and 101 are being reproduced for the sake of ready

reference:

"1 00. It is noted that in the c o ~ n m e n t sreceived

fi-on1 the stakeholders and the agreenlents
entered by service providers, varied t e r n ~ slike
malslteting fee, bclndwidth support fee, channel
 visibility fee etc. are used for different purposes
and commercial arrangements between
broadcusteis and DPOs. A n y such commercial
arrangement is a type of inter-connection
agreement and therefore it has to be on non-
discriminatory basis. Therefore, to avoid the
regulatory gaps, it has been mandated that in
case more than one interconnection agreement
are entered i t a distributor of television
channels in respect of television channel(s) or
bouquet(s) o f pay channels, each subsequent
interconnection agreeinenr shall contain the
details ofrhe earlier agreements in force with that
distributor for such channel(s) or bouquet(s).

101. It is also obseived that m a n y times a fee in the

name of marketing is paid by a service provider
to other seivice provider for the promotion and
advertisement of its services. Sometimes
broadcasters pi-ovide incentives to the
distributors for inclusion of channels in the
bouquets offered by the DPO i1.1 the name o f
innrketing. In these regulations, the Authority has
clearly mandated that no incentive, in whatsoever
name can be given b y the broadcaster to the DPO
for inclusion of its channels in the DPO's bouquet
because it results in pushing o f c l i ~ n n e l sto the
subscribers. The marketing fee towards
promotion and advei-tisenlent of services
contributes towards incre~lsein business which is
due to the effort of the two parties. Therefore,
there cannot he a specific parameter for
reguluting such fee. Hence, at this stage, a n y
regulation b y Authority on such fee is bound to be
a porous regulation. Still the Aurhority has
permitted that a service provider m a y offer
 55
transparent disco~lntto the other senlice provider
out of the limit of 15% if it is mutually agreed.
However it has to be decided that al?y agreement,
for a n y kind of fee for a channel, between two
s e ~ v i c e providers should be made part o f
interconnection agreement and reported to the
Authority to enable the Authority to monitor
industry practices."

W. For that Impugned Order shall have far reachlng

repercussions oil the industry, inasmuch as i t keeps

landing page agreements outside the scope of

'interconnection agreements', which would 'undoubtedly

perpetuate discriminatory practices in the industry.

X. For that the landing page agreements are entered into

between two service providers viz., broadcaster and

distributor and they are 'interconnection agreements' as

they satisfy the definition of 'interconnection'. .4 landing

page agreement involves con~mercialarrangements and

technical changes in the system of distributor of

television channels, so as to ensure that the channel is
provided to the consumer in that particular agreed
manner.

Y. For that in Interconnection Regulations, 2017,

'placement' has been provided for in a particular manner,

as borne out of regulatioils 3 ( 3 )and 18 of Interconnection

Regulations, 2017 and as explained in paras. 96-101 of
Explanatory Memorandum to Interconnection
 *
'

56"
Regulations, 2017. However, landing page

placements/agreemeilts are not conten~platedor covered

by' Interconnection Regulations, 2017

Z. For that, the Hon'ble TDS.AT failed to appreciate that the

Interconnection Regulations, 201 7 deal with placement of

channel w l t h n a genre. An advantageously placed

channel within the genre gets the benefit when the

consumer chooses to visit that genre. In a landing page

arrangement, the said channel appears for viewing before

the consumer, irrespecti\:e of whether the viewer wishes

to watch i t at that time. The said channel gets preference

over all channels over all genres. This aspect of placing

the channel o n landing page is not covered by

Interconnection Regulations, 2017. As such, the

.Authority is well within its powers to issue Impugned

Direction to cover the issue of landing page. It is not in

. -
conflict with, or, in derogation of Interconnection

Regulations, 2017.

5. The Appellant craves leave to add to, alter or:amend all or

any of the above grounds of Appeal.

6. The Appellant has not filed any other Petition/ Appeal

against the Impugned Judgment and Order dated

29.05.2019.
 PRAYER 57
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that Your Lordships

may graciously be pleased to:

a) Allor\- the Appeal and set aside the Impugned

Order datecl 29.05.2019 passed by the
Co~nrnol~
Hon'ble Tflecoln Disputes Settleinent & Appellate
Tribunal, New Delhi in Broadcasting Appeal No. 2 of
2018, Broadcasting Appeal No. 4 of 2018 &
Broadcasting Appeal No. 1 of 2019; and/or

b) Pass such further and other reliefs as this Hon'ble

Court inay deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.

FOR THE ACT OF KINDNESS THE APPELLANT AS IN DUTY

BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

(SANJAY KAPUR)
Advocate for the AppelIant

Filed on: 11.07.2019

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
sea
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. ----------OF 2019

IN THE MLT'TER OF:

Telecoill Regulatory Authority of India .. . Appellant
-\'ersus-
Bennett Coleman Sr CO. $oh%. ck. ... Respondents

CERTIFIC-ATE

"Certified that the Civil Appeal is confined only to the pleadings

before the Court whostl order is challcngecl and the other

doculnents relied upon in those proceedings. No Additional

grounds have been taken therein or relied upon in the C i d

Appeal. It is further certified that the copies of the
documents/Annexure attached to the Civil Appeal are necessary
to answer the question of law raised in the appeal or to make out
,,.~
grounds urged in the civil appeal for -consideration of this Hon'ble

Court. This certificate is given on the basis of the instructions

. .
given by the Appellant whose affidavit is filed in support of the

civil appeal.

(SANJAY KAPUR)
Advocate for the Appellant

Filed on: I. 1.07.2019

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2019
IN THE MATTER OF:

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India .. . Appellant

!2 b
Bennett Coleman & C R .I.</ , h a~k . ... Respondents

I, *bind Kumar, , s/o Mr. G y m Chandra Gupta, aged 48 years,

worlung as Advisor (B&CS)in the Telecom ~egulatol'yAuthority of
India, having office at blahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan, Jawahar La1
Nehru blarg, Old blinto Road, Near Zalar Hussain College, New
Delh-110002, solemnly state and declare as here under:-

1. That I am worlung as Advisor (B&CS), of the Appellant

Authority and am acquainted with the facts giving rise to the above
Appeal.

2. That 1 have perused the Appeal, List of relevant dates and

,-
Interlocutory ~pplications- whlch are being filed in this Hon'ble
on behalf of the Appellant.
. .
I sap that the starem6nts of fact contained' in the 4.p&ixt>~:~.~,~
9 ;;,, :!g ,. ,. ,, % ..:
paras 1-to 6_:, pages -%J to5J,.I-lst of relevant dates p a g ,,e. k ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ & < ~ ~
I ; , - ,.:.
?- and lnterlocuthry Applications are true to my know~&J&~..r:,/<~
c...'.>,::,:r
9 .,
further say that the documents/ annexures amexed to the ,4ppe3.-.
are true and correct to my knowledge and belief

Solemnly affirmed at N
T h s J$- day of ~d
ea'dk
J , 2019
)

&
Dep e
 I, the deponent above named, do hereby verify that the
statement of facts contained in the affidavit are true and correct to
my knowledge and the legal submissions are believed by me to be
true and correct.

Verified --
\\
-, thls - day Ol!9
 A N H ~ - ~A-
UR / E:
T O B E PUBLISHED M THE GAZETTE OF DJDIA, EXTRAORDINARY,
PART 111, SECTION 4

T E L E C O M R E G U L A T O R Y A U T H O R I T Y O F INDIA
NOTIFICATION

New Delhi the 30"' April, 2012

F'C-

F. No. 3- 2412012- B&CS - In exercise of the powers conferred by section 36, read with
sub-ciauses (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v) of clause (b) of sub-section ( I ) of section 1 1 of the Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India Act; 1997 (24 of 1997), read with notification of the
Government of India, in the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology
(Department of Telecommunication) No.39,-----

(a) issued, in exercise of the powers c o n f e ~ ~ eupon

d the Central Government under clause (d)

- of sub-section (1) of section I 1 and proviso to clause (k) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the
said Act, and
(b) published under notification No. S.0.44 (E) and 45 (E) dated the 9th January, 2004 in the
Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part 111; Section 4, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
hereby makes the lollowing regulations, namely:-

T H E T E L E C O M M U N I C A T I O N (BROADCASTING AND CABLE SERVICES)

I N T E R C O N N E C T I O N (DIGITAL ADDRESSABLE C A B L E TELEVISION SYSTEMS)
REGULATIONS, 2012 =:

No. 9 of 2012
 CHAPTER - I
PRELIMINARY

1. Short title and commencement.- (I) These regulations may be called the
Telecommunication (BI-oadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection (Digital Addressable
Cable Television Systems) Regulations. 2012.

(2) They shall come into force with effect from the date of their publication in the Official
Gazette.

2. Definitions.- In these regulations, unless the context otherwise requires : -

(a) "Act" means the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act 1997 (24 of 1997);

(b) "addressable system" tneans an electronic device (which includes hardware and its
associated software) or more than one electronic device put in an integrated system through
which signals of cable television network can be sent in enclypted fonn, which can be
decoded by the device or devices, having an activated Conditional Access System at the
premises of the subscriber within the limits of authorisation made, through the Conditional
Access System and the subscriber management system, on the explicit choice and request of
such subscriber, by the cable operator to the subscriber:

(c) "agent or intermediary" means any person including an individual, group of persons,
public or body corporate, firm or any organization or body authorised by a broadcaster1 multi
system operator to make available TV chamel/s, to a distributor of TV channels;

(d) "a-la-carte" with reference to offering of a TV channel means offering the channel
individually on a standalone basis;

(e) "a-la-carte rate" means the rate at which a standalone individual channel is offered to the
distributor of TV channels or to the subscriber, as the case may be;

(i) "Authority" means the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India established under sub-
section ( I ) of section 3 of the Telecom Regulatoly Authority of India Act, 1997;
 (g) "broadcaster" means a person or a group of persons, or body corporate, or any
organisation or body providing programming services and includes his or its authorised
distribution agencies;

(h) "broadcasting services" means the dissemination of any form of communication such as
signs, signals, writing, pictures, images and sounds of all kinds by transmission of electro
magnetic waves through space or through cables intended to be received by the general
public either directly or indirectly and all its grammatical variations and cognate expressions
shall be construed accordingly;

(i) "bouquet" or "bouquet of channels" means an assortment of distinct channels, offcred

together as a group or as a bundle;

6) "bouquet rate" or "rate of bouquet" means the rate at which a bouquet of channels is
offered to the distributor of TV channels or to the subscriber, as the case may be;

(k) "cable operator" means any person who provides cable service through a cable television
networkar otherwise controls or is responsible for the management and operation of a cable
television networlc and fillfils the prescribed eligibility criteria and conditions:

(I) "cable service" means the transmission by cables of programmes including re-transmission
by cables of any broadcast television signals,
-.

(m) "cable television nerwork" means any system consisting of a set of closed transmission
paths and associated signal gencration, control and distribution equipment, designed to
provide cable service for reception by multiple subscribers;

(n)"carriage fee" means any fee paid by a broadcaster to a distributor of TV channels, for
carriage of tlie channels or bouquets of channels of that broadcaster on the distributicn
platform owned or operated by such d~stributorof TV channels, without specifying the
placement of various channels of the broadcaster vis-a-vis channels of other broadcasters;
(0) "commercial subscriber" means any subscriber Cho receives a programming service at a
place indicated by him to a service provider and uses signals of such service for the benefit of
his clients, customers, members or any other class or group of persons having access to such
place;

(p) "DAS area" means the areas where in terms of notifications issued by the Central
Government under sub-section (1) of section 4A of the Cable Television Networks
(Regulation) Act, 1995 (7 of 1995): it is obligatory for every cable operator to transmit or re-
transmit programmes of any channel in an encrypted form through a digital addressable
system;

(q) "distributor of TV channels" means any person including an individual, group of persons,
public or body corporate, firm or any organization or body re-transmitting TV channels
through electromagnetic waves through cable or through space intended to be received by
general public directly or indirectly and such person may include, but is not limited to a multi
system operator;

(r) "free-to-air channel", in respect of a cable television network, means a channel for which
no subscription fee is to be paid by the cable operator to the broadcaster for its re-
transmission on cable;

(s) "Multi-System Operator" means a cable operator who has been granted registration
under rule 11C of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, and who receives a
programming service from a broadcaster or its authorised agenciesand re-transmits the same
or transmits his own programming service for simultaneous reception either by multiple
subscribers directly or through one or more local cable operators and includes his authorised
distribution agencies, by whatever name called;

(t) "ordinary subscriber" means any subscriber who receives a programming service from a
multi system operator directly or through his linked local cable operator and uses the same
for his domestic purposes;
(u) "pay channel", in respect of a cable television network, means a chamel for which
subscription fees is to be paid to the broadcaster by the cable operator and due authorisation
needs to be taken from the broadcasrer for its re-transmission on cable;

(v) "placement fee" means any fee paid by a broadcaster to a distributor of TV channels, for
placement of the channels of such broadcaster vis-8-vis channels of other broadcasters on the
distribution platform owned or operated by such distributor of TV channels;

(w) "programme" means any television broadcast and includes-

(i) exhibition of films, features, dramas, advertisements and serials through video
cassctte recorders or video cassette players;
(iij any audio or visual or audio-visual live performance or presentation
and the expression "programming service" shall be construed accordingly:

(x) " N O " means the Reference Interconnect Offer published by a service provider specifying
terms and conditions on which other service provider may seek interconnection form the
service provider making the offer;

(y) "service provider" means the Government as a service provider and includes a licensee as
well as any broadcaster, ~nultisystem operator, cable operator or distributor of TV Charnels;

( z ) "set top box" means a device, which is connected to, or is part of a television and which
allows a subscriber to receive in unencrypted and descrambled form subscribed channels
through an addressable system; -.

(za) "subscriber" means a person who receives the signals of a service provider at a place
indicated by him to the service provider without further transmitting it to any other person
and includes ordinary subscribers and commercial subscribers unless specifically excluded;

(zb)"subscriber base" means the number of subscribers reflected in the subscriber

managemenl system, of the digital addressable systems;

(zc) "subscriber management system" means a system or device which stores the subscriber
records and details with respect to name, address and other information regarding the
5
hardware being utilised by the subscriber, channels or bouquets of channels subscribed to by
the subscriber, price of such channels or bouquets of channels as defined in the system, the
activation or deactivation dates and time for any channel or bouquets of channels, a log of zII
actions performed on a subscriber's record, invoices raised on each subscriber and the
amounts paid or discount allowed to the subscriber for each billing period;

(zd) "TV channel" means a channel, which has been registered under -----
(i) the guidelines for uplinking from India, issued vide No. 150 1/2/2002-TV(I)(Pt.)
dated the 2nd December, 2005; or
(ii) policy guidelines for downlinking of televisions channels, issued vide No.
131212002-BP&LiBC-IV dated the 1 lth November, 2005, ---------
as amended from time to time, or such other guidelines for uplinking or downlinking of
television channels, as may be issued from time to time by Government of India (Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting) and reference to the term 'channel' shall be construed as a
reference to "TV channel";

(ze ) all other words and expressions used in this regulations but not defined, and defined in
the Act and rules and regulations made thereunder or the Cable Television Networks
(Regulation) Act, 1995 (7 of 1995) and the rules and regulations made thereunder, shall have
the meanings respectively assigned to then1 in those Acts or the rules or regulations, as the
case may be.
 C H A P T E R - I1
INTERCONNECTION

3. General Provisions relating to interconnection.-(I) No broadcaster of TV channels

shall engage in any practice or activity or enter into any understanding or arrangement,
including exclusive contract with any multi systcm opcrator for distribution of its channel
which may prevent any other multi system operator from obtaining such TV channels for
distribution.

(2) Every broadcaster shall provide signals of its TV channels on non-discriminatory basis to
every multi system operator having the prescribed channe! capacity and registered under rule
I 1 of the Cable Television Networks Rules. 1994, making request for the same.

Provided that nothing contained in this sub-regulation shall apply in the case of a multi
system operator who is in default of payment.

Provided further that imposition of any term which is unreasonable shall be deemed as a
denial-of request.

(3) Every broadcaster or his authorized agent shall provide the signals of TV channels to
a inulti system operator, in accordance with its reference interconnect offer or as may be
~nutuallyagreed, within sixty days from the date of receipt of the request and in case the
request for providing signals of TV Channels is not agreed to, thereasons for such refusal ~o
provide signals shall be conveyed to the person making a request within sixty days from the
date of request.

(4) Every multi system operator while seeking interconnection with the broadcaster:
shall ensure that its digital addressable system installed for the distribution of TV channels
meets the digital addressable system requirements specified in Schedule I to these
regulations:

Provided that in case the broadcaster finds lhat the digital addressable system being used by
the multi system operator for distribution of TV channel does not meet the requirements
7
specified in the Schedule 1; it shall inform such multi system operator who shall get its digital
addressable system audited by MIS. Broadcast Engineering Consultants India Ltd., or any
other agency as may be specified by the Authority by direction issued from time to time and
obtain a certificate from such agency that its system meets the requirements specified in
Schedule I to these regulations :

Provided further that the findings of the agency referred to in the first proviso shall be final.

( 5 ) A ~nultisystem operator, who seeks signals of a particular TV channel from a broadcaster,

shall not demand carriage fee for carrying that channel on its distribution platform.

(6) If a broadcaster before providing signals to a multi system operator insist for
placement of its channel in a particular slot as a pre-condition for providing signals, such pre-
condition shall amount to imposition of unreasonable terms.

(7) Every broadcaster or his authorised agent who collects payment on behalf of such
broadcaster, shall issue monthly invoice to the multi system operator for providing signals to
the multi system operator and such invoiceis shall clearly specify the current payment dues
and arrears, if any, along with the due date for payment.

(8) Every multi system operator, operating in the areas notified by the Central
Government under sub-section (1) of the section 4A of the Cable Television Networks
(Regulation) Act, 1995, shall have the capacity to carry a minimum of five hundred channels
not later than the date mentioned in the said notification applicable to area in which the multi
system operator is operating.

Provided that a ~nulti system operator operating in the Municipal boundary of Greater
Mumbai, National Capital Tenito~y of Delhi, Kolkata Metropolitan area and Chennai
Metropolitan area shall have a capacity to carry a minimum of two hundred channels as on
the 301h June, 2012 and such capacity shall be enhanced to a minimum of five hundred
channels by 1" January, 20 13:
Provided further that all multi system operators operating in the area referred to in the first
proviso and having subscriber base of less than twenty five thousand shall have the capacity
to carry a minimum of,five hundred channels by the 1" April, 2013.

(9) No multi system operator shall enter into any understanding or arrangement with any
broadcaster that may prevent any other broadcaster from obtaining access to the cable
network of such multi system operator.

(10) Every multi system operator shall, within sixty days of receipt of request from the
broadcaster or its authorised agent or intermediary, provide on non-discriminatory basis,
access to its network or convey the reasons for rejection of request if the access is denied to
such broadcaster.

Provided that it shall not be mandatory for a multi system operator to carry the channel of a
broadcaster if the channel is not in regional language of the region in which the multi system
operator is operating or in Hindi or in English language and the broadcaster is not willing to
pay the uniform carriage fee published by the multi system operator in its Reference
Interconnect Offer.

Provided further that nothing contained in this sub-regulation shall apply in case of a
broadcaster who has failed to pay the carriage fee as per the agreement and continues to be in
default.

Provided also that imposition of unreasonable terms and conditions for providing access to
the cable TV network shall amount to the denial of request for such access.

Provided also that it shall not be mandatory for the multi system operator to cany a channel
for a period of next one year from the date of discontinuation of the channel, if the
subscription for that particular channel, in the last preceding six months is less than or equal
to five per cent. of the subscriber base of that multi system operator taken as an average of
subscriber base of the preceding six months.
(1 1) If a multi system operator before providing access to its network to a broadcaster
insist on placement of the channel of such broadcaster in a particular slot or bouquet, such
precondition shall amount to imposition of unreasonable terms.

(12) Every multi system operator shall publish in its Reference Interconnect Offer the
carriage fee for carrying a channel of a broadcaster for which no request has been made by
the multi system operator:

Provided that the carriage fee shall be uniform for all the broadcasters and the same shall not
be revised upwards for a minimum period of two years from the date of publication in the
Reference Interconnect Offer.

(13) Every multi system operator or his authorised agent who collects on behalf of such
multi system operator the carriage fee from a broadcaster shall issue monthly invoiceis to
such broadcaster and such invoiceis shall clearly specify the current payment dues and
arrears, if any, along with the due date of payment.

(14) Every multi system operator or their authorized agent shall provide the signals of TV
Channels to a local cable operator in accordance with its reference interconnect offer or as
may be mutually agreed, within sixty days from the date of receipt of the request and in case
the request for providing signals of TV Channels is not agreed to, the reasons for such refusal
to provide signals shall be conveyed to the person making a request within sixty days from
the date of request.
-.

(15) Every multi system operator or his authorised agent who collects on behalf of such
multi system operator the payment from the local cable operator for providing signals shall
issue monthly invoiceis to such cable operator and such invoiceis shall clearly specify the
current payment dues and arrears, if any, along with the due date of payment.

(16) Every demand of arrears under these regulations sllall be accompanied by the proof of
service of invoices for the period for which the arrears pertain.
 C H A P T E R - I11
REFERENCE INTERCONNECT OFFER

4. General Provisions relating to Reference ~nterconnection Offer.--(l) Every

broadcaster shall, within thirty days of commencement of these regulations, submit to the
.Authority its Reference Interconnecr Offer specifying the technical and commercial terms
and conditions including the terms and conditions as mentioned in Schedule I1 of this
regulation and publish it on its website.

Provided that a broadcaster may submit different interconnect offers for different types uf
digital addressable system.

(2) No broadcaster shall, directly or indirectly, prohibit any digital addressable cable TV
system operator from providing its services to any subscriber.

(3) A broadcaster may specify different Reference Interconnect Offers for supply of
signals by the multi system operators to different categories of commercial subscribers such
as --
(a) hotels with rating of three stars and above;
(b) heritage hotels, as specified in the guidelines for classifications of hotels issued by the
Department of Tourism, Govt. of India ;
(c) any other hotel: motel, inn and other commercial establishments providing boarding and
lodging having fifty or more rooms ; and
may also specify different reference interconnect offers for pregrammes telecast on the
occasion of special events and viewed on payment basis by fifty persons or more at a place
registered under the applicable law for such viewing:

Provided that the Reference Interconnect Offer applicable for ordinary subscriber shall also
apply for the commercial subscribers other than those specified in this sub-regulation.

(4) Every broadcaster shall modify their existing Reference Interconnect Offer within
thirty days of commencement of these regulations so as to bring them in conformity with
provisions of these regulations.
(5) Any broadcaster, wlio begins its operation after the commencement of the,e
regulations, shall, thirty days prior to commencement of its operations, submit to the
Authority its Reference Interconnect Offer and publish such offer on its website.

(6) Every broadcaster shall submit to the Authority within seven days any amendment
made in its Reference Interconnect Offer and simultaneously publish such amendments on its
website in the same manner in which the original Reference Interconnect Offer was
published.

(7) Every multi system operator shall, within thirty days from the date of
commencement of these regulations publish its Reference Interconnect Offer specifying the
technical and commercial terms and conditions for providing access to its network by the
broadcaster'and submit a copy to the Authority.

(8) Every person or firm or company wlio begins its services as ~nultisystem operator
shall, before providing its services, publish its Reference Interconnect Offer specibing the
technical and commercial terms and conditions for providing access to its network by the
broadcaster and submit a copy to the Authority.
(9) The Authority may, in order to protect the interest of the consumer and the service
provider and to promote and ensure orderly growth of broadcasting and cable services, direct
the service provider to modify its Reference Interconhect Offer.
 C H A P T E R - IV
INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENTS

5. General Provisions relating to interconnection agreements.- (1) A multi system

operator may enter into an agreement with the broadcaster in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the Reference Interconnect Offer published by the broadcaster on such non-
discriminatory terms and conditions.

(2) Every broadcaster shall, who publishes revised Reference Interconnect Offer after the
commencement of these regulations, give an option to all multi system operators to enter into
an agreement in accordance with the revised Reference Interconnect Offer and it shall be
open to the multi system operator to enter into fresh agreement or continue with the existing
agreement.

(3) Every broadcaster shall, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of request
from the multi system operator, enter into an interconnection agreement or modify the
existing interconnect agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Reference
Interconnect Offer published under these regulations or as may be mutually agreed.

(4) Every broadcaster shall offer all its channels to the multi system operator on a-la-carte
basis :

Provided that the broadcaster may, in addition to offering all its channels on a-la-carte basis,
offer its channels in the form of bouquet. .

(5) No broadcaster shall compel any multi system operator to include its channels or
bouquet of channels in any package or scheme offered by the multi system operator to its
subscribers.

(6) It shall be mandatory for the broadcasters of pay channels to reduce the terms and
conditions of the interconnection agreements into writing.

(7) No broadcaster of pay channels shall make available signals of TV channels to any multi
system operator without entering into a written interconnection agreement.
13
(8) Nothing contained in regulations (6) or (7) shall apply to any supply of signals or
continuance of supply of signals of TV channels by a broadcaster in pursuance of or in
compliance with any order or direction or judgment of any court or tribunal, including any
order or direction or judgment of any court or tribunal on any proceeding pending before
such court or tribunal.

(9) It shall be the responsibility of every broadcaster of pay channels who enters into an
interconnection agreement with a multi system operator to hand over a copy of signed
interconnection agreement to such multi system operator and obtain an acknowledgement in
this regard within a period of 15 days from the datz of execution of the agreement.

(10) In case a broadcaster wants to modify its interconnection agreement entered into
with a multi system operator, it shall give a notice of thirty days to the multi system operator
and any modification in such agreement may be made as per the terms and conditions of the
Reference Interconnect Offer published by the broadcaster under these regulations or as may
be mutually agreed.

(11) In case the broadcaster and the multi system operator fail to enter into an
interconnection agreement, such broadcaster or multi system operator, without prejudice to
the provision of section 14 A of the Act or any other law for time being in force , at any time,
may make a request to the Authority to facilitate the process of entering into such agreement
and the Authority may issue such directions to the broadcaster and the multi-system operator
as it may deem fit. -.

(12) Nothing contained in sub-regulation (1 1) shall apply to any matter or issue pending
adjudication before any court or tribunal or in respect of which a decree, award or an order
has been passed by a court or tribunal.

(13) The interconnection agreement between the multi system operator and its linked local
cable operator shall have the details of various services rendered by the local cable operator
to the multi system operator and the charges to be paid by the multi system operator to the
local cable operator for these services.
(14) The interconnection agreement between the multi system operator and its linked
local cable operator shall clearly eannark the responsibility of generation of subscribers' bill
by the multi system operator and the roles and responsibilities of the multi system operator
and its linked local cable operator on conformance to the quality of service regulations
issued by the Authority from time to time.

(15) It shall be open to a multi systelri operator to decide the packaging of the channels
offered to the subscribers from bouquet of channels provided to it by the broadcaster :

Provided that in case the multi system operator does not offer to a subscriber the entire
bouquet of channels provided to it by the broadcaster but only certain channels of such
bouquet or packages tlie charnels of such bouquet in a manner resulting in diffelent
subscriber base for different channels of such bouquet, the payment to the broadcaster for
such bouquet shall be calculated on the basis of the subscriber base for that channel of the
bouquet which has highest subscriber base.

(16) Every service provider shall enter into a new agreement before the expiry of the
existing agreement and in case the service provider fails to enter into the new agreement
before the expi~yof the said agreement, the provisions of the existing agreement shall
continue to apply till the new agreement is entered into between the service providers or for
the next three months from the date of expiry of existing agreement, whichever is earlier and
if the service providers are able to enter into an agreement before the expiry of the said three
months, the new agreement shall apply from the date of expiry of earlier agreement:

Provided that if service providers are not able to enter into a new agreement, they may be
entitled to disconnect the signals of TV Channels by giving three weeks notice published in
two local newspapers, out of which one shall be published in the newspaper of the regional
language of the area for which the said agreement is applicable.

(17) It shall be mandatory for the multi systelnoperator to reduce the terms and conditions
of tlie interconnection agreements into writing.

(1 8) No multi system operator, shall make available signals of TV channels to any linked
local cable operator without entering into a written interconnection agreement.

15
(19) Nothing contained in regulations (17) or (18) shall apply to any supply of signals or
continuance of supply of signals of TV channels by a millti system operator in pursuance of
or in compliance wit11 any order or direction or judgment of any court or tribunal, including
any order or direction or judgment of any coiirt or tribunal on any proceeding pending before
such court or tribunal.

(20) It shall be [he responsibility of ebery multi system operator to hand over a copy of
signed interconnection agreement who enters into an interconnection agreement with a linked
local cable operatorts to hand over a copy of signcd interconnection agreement to such czble
in t!iis rcgard within a period of 15 days from the
operator and obtain an aciu~o~~ledgement
date of execution of the agreement.

(21) No service provider shall demand from any other service provider a minimum
guaranteed amount as subscription fee for the channels provided by such service provider.
 CHAPTER- V
76
DISCONNECTION O F SIGNALS O F T V CHANNELS

6. Disconnection of signals of T\' Channel .- ( I ) No broadcaster shall disconnect the

signals of a TV Channels of a multi system operator without giving three weeks notice to
such multi system operator, clearly specifying the reasons for the proposed disconnection.

(2) No multi system operator shall disconnect the signals of a TV Channels of a linked local
cable operator, without giving three weeks notice to such local cable operator, clearly
specifying the reasons for the proposed disconnection.

(3) No multi system operator shall disconnect the re-transmission of any TV channel
without giving three weeks notice to the broadcaster, clearly specifying the reasons for the
proposed disconnection.

(4) No local cable operator shall disconnect the re-transmission of any TV channel
without giving t h e e weeks notice to the multi system operator, clearly specifying the
reasons for the proposed disconnection.

(5) Every notice of disconnection of signals of TV channel under sub-regulation (I), (2),
(3) and (4) and every notice of disconnection of re-transmission of TV channel under sub-
regulation (2), (3) and (4) shall be published in two leading local newspapers of the State in
which the service provider is providing the services, out of which one notice shall be
published in the newspaper in local language. -.
.

(6) rile period of three weeks specified under sub-regulation (I), (2): (3) and sub-
regulation (4) shall start from the date of publication of the notice in newspapers or the date
of service of the notice on service provider, whichever is later and in case the notices are
published in newspaper on different dates, the period of three weeks shall be counted from
the later of the two dates.
 C H A P T E R - VI
MISCELLANEOUS

7. Conversion of free to air channel into pay channel o r a pay channel into free to a i r
channel.- A channel once declared free to air channe! or pay channel shall remain such
channel for at least a period of one year and any broadcaster shall>before converting a free to
air channel into pay channel or a pay channel into free to air channel, inform the Authority
and shall give one month's notice before such conversion in two local newspapers, out of
which one shall be published in the newspaper of the regional language of the area in which
such conversion takes place.

8. Intervention by the Authority .-The Authority may, in order to protect the interest
of the consumer or service provider or to promote and ensure orderly growth of the
broadcasting and cable sector or for monitoring and ensuring compliance of these regulations,
by order or direction, intervene, from time to time.

9. Reporting Requirements.- (1) Every multi system operator shall submit to the
Authority information, in the proforma specified in Schedule-111 to these regulations, all
interconnect agreements entered into by it with the broadcaster and local cable operator and
subsequent modifications made therein.

(2) Evety existing multi system operator shall submit to the Authority by 31'' July, 2012,
all interconnect agreements entered into by it and amendments made therein prior to the date
of notification of these regulations.

(3) Every multi system operator commencing its services after the notifications of these
regulations shall submit to Authority its interconnection agreement within thirty days of
entering into the agreement or 31" July, 2012 whichever is later.

(4) Every broadcaster shall furnish the details of carriage fee paid by him to the multi
system operator along with the information furnished by him under the Register of
Interconnect Agreements (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Regulation 2004 (15 of 2004),
as amended from time to time. Such information henceforth shall also include details of
carriage fee paid to the multi system operator by the broadcaster.

(Wasi Ahmad)
Advisor (B&CS)

Note.-----The Explanatory Memorandum explains the objects and reasons of the

Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection (Digital Addressable
Cable Television Systems) Regulation, 2012.
 T O BE PUBLISHED IN T H E GAZETTE O F INDIA, EXTRAORDINARY,
PART 111, SECTION 4
T E L E C O M REGULATORY AUTHORITY O F INDIA
NOTIFICATION

F. No. 21-412016-B&CS.- in excrcise of [he powers conferred by section 36, read with sub-clauses (ii), (iiij
and (iv) of clause (b) of sub-section (I) of section I I of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997
(24 of 1997), read with notification of the Central Government, in the Ministry of Communication and
Information Technology (Department of Telecommunications), No. 39, -

(a) issued, in exercise of the powers conferred upon the Central Government under clause (d) of sub-section (1)
ofsection I I and proviso to clause (k) ofsub-section ( I ) of section 2 o f the said Act, and

(b) published m d e r notification No. S.0.44 (E) and 45 (E) dated the 9Ih January, 2004 in the Gazette of India,
Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3,-

tile Telecom Regulalory Authority of India hereby makes the following regulations, namely:-

T H E TELECOMMUNICATION (BROADCASTING AND CABLE) SERVICES

INTERCONNECTION (ADDRESSABLE SYSTEMS) REGULATIONS, 2017
(No. 1 of 2017)

Page 1 of 110
 CHAPTER - I
PRELIMINARY

1. Short title, extent and commencement.- ( I ) These regulations may be called the Telecommunication
(Broadcasting and Cable) Services Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2017.

(2) These regulations shall cover commercial and technical arrangements, among service providers for
interconnection, for broadcasting services relating to television provided through addressable systems

throughout the territory of lndia.

(3) These regulations shall come into force from the date o f their publication in the Official Gazette.

2. Definitions.- ( I ) In these regulations, unless the context otherwise requires:-

(a) "Act" means the Telecom Regulatory Authority o f lndia Act: 1997 (24 o f 1997);

(b) "active subscriber" for the purpose of these regulations, means a subscriber who has been
authorized to receive signals of television channels as per the subscriber management system and
whose set top box has not been denied signals;

(c) "addressable system" means an electronic device (which includes hardware and its associated
software) or more than one electronic device put in an integrated systeni through which
transmission o f programmes including re-transinission of signals of television channels can be
. -
done in encrypted form, which can be decoded by the device or devices at the premises of the
subscriber within the limits of the authorization made, on the choice and request of such
subscriber, by tl~edistributor of television channeis;

(d) "a-la-carte" or "a-la-carte channel" with reference to offering of a television chamel means
offering the channel individually on a standalone basis;

(e) "Authority" means the Telecom Regulatory Authority of lndia dtablished under sub-section ( I ) of

section 3 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (24 of 1997);

(0 "average active subscriber base" means the number arrived by averaging the active subscriber base

count in the maiuler specified in the Schedule VII;

(g) "bouquet" or "bouquet of channels" means an assortment o f distinct channels offered together as a
group or as a bundle and all its grammatical variations and cognate expressions shall be.construed
accordingly;

(h) "broadcaster" means a person or a group of persons, or body corporate, or any organization or body
who, after having obtained, in its name, downlinking permission for its channels, from the Central
Government, is providing programming services;

Page 2 of 110
(i) "broadcaster's share of rnasiin~niretail price" with reference to a pay channel or a bouquet of pay
channels means any fee payabie by a distributor of television channels to a broadcaster for signals
of pay cl~annelor bouquet of pay chennels, as the case may be, and for wl~ichdue authorization has
been obtained by such distributor from that broadcaster;

(j) "broadcasting services" means the dissemination of any form of communication like signs, signals,
writing, pictures, images and sounds of all kinds by transmission of electro-magnetic waves through
space or through cables intended to be rcceived by the general public either directly or indirectly
and all its grammatical variations and cognate expressions shall be construed accordingly;

(k) "cable service" or "cable T V service" means the transmission of programmes including re-
transmission of signals of television channels through cables;

(I) "cab!e television network" or "cable TV network" means any system consisring of a set of closed
transmission paths an3 associaled signal generation, control and distribulion equipment, designed to
provide cable service for reception by multiple subscribers;

(m) "carriage fee" means any fec payable by a broadcaster to a distributor of television channels only
for the purpose of carrying its cl~annelsthrough the distributor's network, without, specifying the
placement of such channels onto a specific position in the electronic programme.guide or, seeking
assignment of a particular number to such channels;

(n) "compliance officer" means any person designated so, who is capable of appreciating requirements
- for regulatory compliance under these regulations, by a servicc provider;
(0) "direc~to home operator" or "DTH operator" means any person who has been granted licence by
the Central Government to provide direct to home (DTH) service;

(pj "direct to home service" or "DTH service" means re-transmission of signals of television channels,
by using a satellite system, directly to subscriber's premises without passing through a n
intermediary such as local cable operaror or any other distributor otlelevision channels;

(q) "distriburion fee" means any fee payable by a broadcaster to a distributor of television channels for
the purpose of distribution o i pay channel or bouquet of pay channels, as the case may be, to
subscribers and it does not include carriage fee;

(I) "distribution platform" means distribution nehvork of a DTH operator, multi- sys!em operator,
HITS operator or IPTV operator:

(s) "distributor of television channeis" or "distributor" means any DTH operator, multi-system
operaior, HlTS operator or IPTV operator;

(t) "electronic programme guide" or " E P G means a program g u ~ d emaintained by the distributors of
television channels that lists television channels and programmes, and scheduling and programmi~~g

Page 3 of 110
information therein and includes any enhanced guide that allows subscribers to navigate and select
such available channels and programmes;

"free-to-air channel'' or "free-to-air television channel" means a cliannel which is declared as such
by tlie broadcaster and for which no fee is to be paid by the distributor of television channels to the
broadcaster for signals of such channel;

"head end in the sky operator" or "HITS operator" means any person perniined by the Central
Government to provide head end in the sky (HITS) service;

"head end in the sky service" or "HITS service" means transmission of programmes including re-
transmission of signals of television channels-

(i) to intermediaries like local cable operators or multi-system operators by using a

satellite system and not directly to subscribers; and
(ii) to the subscribers by using satellite system and its own cable networks;
"interconnection" lneans co~nlnercialand technical arrangements under which service providers
connect their equipments and netujorks to provide broadcasting services to the subscribers;

"interconnection agreement" with all its grammatical variations and cognate expressions means
agreements on interconnection providing technical and comniercial terms and conditions for
distribution of signals of television channel;

"internet protocol television operator" or "IPTV operator" nieans a person permitted by the Central
Government to provide IPTV service;

"internet protocol relevision service" or "IPTV service" nieans delivery of multi channel television
programmes in addressable mode by using Internet Protocol over a closed network of one or Inore
service providers;

"local cable operator" or "LCO" means a person registered under rule 5 of the Cable Television
-.
Networks Rules, 1994;

"maximum retail price" or "MRP" for tlie purpose of these regulations, means the maximum price,
excluding taxes, payable by a subscriber for a-la-carte pay channel or bouquet of pay channels, as
the case !nay be;

"multi-system operator" or "MSO" means a cable operator who has been granted registration under
rule I I of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994 and who receives a programming service
from a broadcaster and re-transmits the same or transmits his own programming service for
simultaneous reception either by multiple subscribers directly or through one or more local cable
operators;

"nehvork capacity fee" means the amount, excluding taxes, payable by a subscriber to the

Page 4 of 110
 distributor o f television channels for distribu!ion network capacity subscribed by that subscriber to
receive the signals o f subscribed television channels and i t does not include subscription fee for pay
channel or bouquet o f pay channels, as the case may be;

(ff) "pay broadcaster" means a broadcaster which has declared its one or more channels as pay channel
to the Authority under the provisions o f applicable regulations or tariff order, as the case may be;

(gg) "pay channel" means a channel which is declared as such by the broadcaster and for which a share
o f maximum retail price is to be paid to the broadcaster by the distributor of television channels and

for which due authorization needs to be obtained from the broadcaster for distribution o f such
channel to subscribers;

(hh) "programme" means any television broadcast and includes.

(i) exhibition o f films, features, dramas, advertisements and serials;

(ii) any audio or visual or audio-visual live performance or presentation,

and the expression "programming service" shall be construed accordingly;

(ii) "QoS Regulations" means the Telecommunica(ion (Broadcasting and Cable) Services Standards o f

Quality o f Service and Consumer Protection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 201 7;

jij) "reference interconnection offer'' or "RIO" means a document published by a service provider

specifying lerms and conditions on which the other service provider may seek interconnection with

. . such service provider;

(kk) "service provider" means the Government as a service provider and includes a licensee as well as
any broadcaster, distributor of television channels or local cable operator;

(11) "set top box" or "STB" means a device,,which is connected to or is part of a television receiver and

which enables a subscriber to view subscribed channels:

..
(mm) "subscriber" for the purpose o f these regulations, means a person who receives broadcasting

services, from a distributor o f television channels, at a place indicated by such person without

further transmitting it to any other person and who does not cause the signals o f television channels

to be heard or seen by any person for a specific sun1 o f money to be paid by such person, and each
set top box located at such place, for receiving the subscribed broadcasting services, shall constitute
one subscriber:

(nn) "subscriber management system" means a system or device which stores the subscriber records and
details with respect to name, address and other information regarding the hardware being utilized by
the subscriber, channels or bouquets o f channels subscribed by the subscriber, price o f such
channels or bouquets of channels as defined in the system, the activation or deactivation dates and

time for any channel or bouquets of channels, a log o f all actions performed on a subscriber's

Page 5 of 110
 record, invoices raised on each subscriber and the amounts paid or discount allowed to the

subscriber for each billing period;

(00) "tariff order'' means the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services (Eighth)

(Addressable Systems) Tariff Order, 201 7;

(pp) "television channel" means a channel, which has been granted permission for downlinking by the
Central Government under the policy guidelines issued or amended by i t from time to time a11d
reference to the rerm 'channel' shall be construed as a reference to "television channel".

(2) A l l other words and expressions used in these regulations but not defined, and detined in the Act and
rules and regulations made thereunder or the Cable Television Nehvorks (Regulation) Act, 1995 (7 o f 1995)
and the rules and regulations made thereunder, shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in

those Acts or the rules or reglllations, as the case may be.

Page 6 of 110
 CHAPTER I1
INTERCONNECTION

3. General obligations of broadcasters.- ( I ) N o broadcaster shall engage in any practice or activity or enter
into any understanding or arrangement including exclusive contracts with any distributor of television channels
that prevents any other distributor o f television channels from obtaining signals of television channel of such
broadcaster for distribution.

(2) Every broadcaster shall, within sixry days of receipt o f written request from a distributor o f television
channels for obtaining signals of television channel or within thirty days of signing o f interconnection
agreement with tlie distributor, as [lie case may be, provide, on non-discriminatory basis, the signals o f
television channel to the distributor or convey the reasons in writing for rejection of the request if the signals of
television channel are dcnied to such distributor:

Provided that imposition of any term or condition by the broadcaster, which is unreasonable, shall ue
deemed to conslitule a denial of request:

Provided further that this sub-regulation shall not apply to a distributor of television channels, who
requests signals of a particular television channel from a broadcaster while at the same time demands
carriage fee for distribution of that television channel or who is in default o f payment to the broadcaster
and continues to be in such default.

( j ) I f a broadcaster, proposes or stipulates for. directly or indirectly, placing the channel in any specified

position in the electronic programme guide or assigning a particular channel number, as a pre-condition ior
providing signals, such pre-condition shall also amount to imposition o f unreasonable condition.

For removal of doubt, it is clarified that i f a pay broadcaster offers discount, in non-discriminatory
Espla~ia~ior~:
manner, through its reference interconnect offer on the maximum retail price o f pay channel, within the limit as
specified in sub-regulation (4) of regulation 7, to distributors of television Fhannels for placing the channel in
any specified position in the electronic programme guide or assigning particular channel number, such offer of
discount shall not be considered a pre-condition.

(4) N o broadcaster shall propose, stipulate or demand for, directly or indirectly, packaging of the channel in any
particular bouquet offered by the distributor of television channels to subscribers.

(5) No broadcaster sliall propose, stipl~lateor demand forl directly or indirectly, guarantee o f a minimum
subscriber base or a minimum subscription percentage for its channel or bouquet.

Page 7 of 110
Explanarion: For removal of doubt, it is clarified that the subscription percentage of a channel or bouquet refers
to the percentage of subscribers subscribing to a specific channel or bouquet out of average active subscriber
base of a distributor.

4. General obligations of distributors of television cl~annels.- ( I ) No distributor of television channels siall

engage in any practice or activity or enter into any understanding or arrangement including exclusive contracts
with any broadcaster that prevents any other broadcaster from obtaining access to the network of such
distributor for distribution of its channel.

(2) No distributor of television channels shall engage in any practice or activity or enter into an)' understanding
or arrangement including exclusive contracts with any local cable operator that prevents any other local cable
operator from obtaining signals of television channels from such distributor for further distribution.

(3) Every distributor of television channels shall declare coverage area of each distribution network as a target
market:

Provided that it shall be permissible for a distributor to declare, in non-discriminatory manner, any area
within the coverage area of distribution network a s a rarget market.

Explanaiion: For the purpose of this regulation, each Head-end or Earth Station, as the case may be, and its

associated network used for distribution of signals of television chatmels shall constitute one distribution
network.

. .
(4) Every distributor of television channels shall, within thirty days from the com~nencement of these
regulations or within thirty days from the commencement of its operations, a s the case may be, on its website,
publish-
(a) target markets as declared under subregulation (3) of this regulation;
(b) the total channel carrying capacity of its distribution network in terms of number of standard definition
channels;
.
(c) list of channels available on the nehvork;
(d) number of channels for wliicli signals of television channels have been requested by the distributor from
broadcasters and the interconnection agreements signed;
(e) spare channel capacity available on the network for the purpose of carrying signals of television
channels; and
(f) list of channels, in chronological order, for wliicli requests have been received from broadcasters for
distribution of their channels, the inrerconnection agreements have been signed and are. pending for
distriburion due to non-availability of the spare channel c+pacity:

Provided that the list of channels in chronological order, under clause (f), shall be prepared on the basis
of date and time ofreceipt ofthe written request from tile broadcaster:

Page 8 of 110
 Provided further that for the purpose of calculating spare channel capacity of the distribution network,
one high definition channel shall be equal to two standard def~nitioncliannels:

Provided fitrther that spare channel capacity available on the network under clause (e) shall be the

difference between the total channel carrying capacity o f the distribution network and numbers o:
channels available on the distribution network in t e n s of standard detinition channels:

Provided furlher that any subsequent change, due to addition or reduction in total channel c a v i n g
capacity o f the d~stributionnetwork or due to addition of channels on the distribution nehvork or due to
discontinuation of existing channels available on Oistribution the network, shall be reflected in the
spare channel capacity:

Provided also that any change in the information, published under this sub-regulation, shall be updated

on the website wi;hin seven calendar days from tile date ofoccurrence ofsuch change.

( 5 ) Every distributor shall allocate every alternate spare channel capacity on its nenvork to the channels, in
sequential manner, listed under clause (0of sub-regulation (4), for distribution of the television channels.

(6) Nothing contained in the sub-regulation (5) shall appl) if no request for distriburion o f a television channel is
pending under clause (fj ofsub-regulation (4).

(7) Subject to the availability of spare channel capacity on the distribution network, under sub-regulation (4),
every distributor of television channels shall, within sixty days o f receipt of written request from a broadcaster

for distribution of television channel or within thirty days of signing of written interconnection agreement with
the broadcaster, as the case may be, cmy, on non-discriminatory basis, the signals of such television cliannel or
convey rhe reasons in writing for rejection of request if the distribution of such television cllannel is denied to
the broadcaster:
.

Provided that imposition of any term or condition by the distributor of television channels, which is
unreasonable, shall be deemed to constitute a denial of request:

Provided further that norhing'contained in this sub-regulation shall apply to a broadcastcr who refuses
to pay the carriage fee to the distributor of television channels or who is in default of payment to the
distributor and continues to be in such default.

(8) It shall be permissible to the distributor of television channels to discontinue carrying of a television channel
in case the monthly subscription percentage for that channel is less tl~anUve percent o f the monthly average
active subscribcr base of that dist1,ibutor in the target market specified in the interconnection agreement, in each
of the immediately preceding six consecutive months:

Page 9 of 110
 Provided that for the purpose o f calculation o f monthly subscription percentage for high definition
television cl~annel,the monthly average active subscriber base shall be of subscribers capable of
receiving high definition television channels.

(9) A distributor o f television channels shall not be under obligation to carry a channel which has been
discontinued as per sub-regulation (8), for a period of one year from the date of such discontinuation.

(10) Ifa distributor of television cl~annels,before providing access to the network for distribution o f television
channels requested by a broadcaster: directly or indirectly, proposes, stipulates or demands for a minimum
guarantee for period or number o f channels, as a pre-condition for providing access to the network, such pre-
condition shall also amount to imposition ofunreasonable condition.

( I I ) Every distributor o f television channels shall, within sixty days of receipt o f written request from a local
cable operator or within thirty days o f signing o f written interconnection agreement with the local cable
operator, as the case may be, provide, on non-discriminatory basis, signals o f television channels to sucl~local
cable operator or convey the reasons in writing for rejection o f request if the signals are denied to such local

cable operator:

Provided that imposition o f any term or condition by the distributor o f television channels, which is
unreasonable, shall be deemed to constitute a denial of request:

Provided further that in case, it is not feasible to provide signals o f television channels at a location
where the signals have been requested by the local cable operator, the distributor o f television channels
shall inform the local cable operator within thirty days from the date o f receipt o f request the reasons
for such non-feasibility:

Provided further that this sub-regulation shall not apply in case o f a. local cable operator who is in

default o f payment o f a distributor oftelevision channels and continues to be in such default:

Provided also that a local cable operator shall not be treated as being in default o f payment to a

distributor if i t has made payment o f all bills o f preceding six months.

(I?) N o disbibutor o f television channels shall, for providing signals o f television channels to a local cable
operator, propose, stipulate or demand for, directly or indirectly, guarantee o f a minimum subscriber base.

(i:) Nothing contained i n the sub-regulation ( I I ) and sub-regulation (12) o f this regulation shall apply to a DTH
operator.

Page 10 of 110
5. General obligations of senrice providers.- (1) No servicc provider shall, directly or indirectly, prohibi
another service provider from providing its services to any subscriber or in any geographical area, as the easc
may be.

( 2 ) No service provider sllall, propose, stipulate or demand for, direetl) or indirectly, paymcnt of a minimum
guarantee amount by othcr srrvice provider for providing signals of television channels or access to the network,
as the case inay be.

(3) Every serifice provider shall issce monthly invoice, to the other service provider \\ith whom intercomection
agreements have been entered into, for collection of payment and such invoice shall clearly specify the currenr
pagmen! dues and arrears, if any, dong wit11 ihe due date for payment.

(4) Any claim for a!.rears by the service provider under these regulations, ahall be accompanied by proof o f
service of invoices far the periods to which the arrears pertain,
 CHAPTER I11
REFERENCE INTERCONNECTlON OFFER

6. Compulsory offering of channels on a-la-carte basis.- ( I ) Every broadcaster shall offer all its television
channels on a-la-carte basis lo the distributors of television channels:

Provided that the broadcaster may also offer its pay channels, in addition to offering ofpay channels on
a-la-carte basis, in form of bouquet:

Provided further that such bouquet shall not contain-.

(a) any 'free-to-air channel'; and

(b) I-ligh definition (HD) and Standard Definition (SD) variants o f the same channel.

7. Publication of reference interconnection offer by broadcaster for pay channels.- (1) Every broadcaster
shall publish, on its website, reference interconnection offer, in conformance with the regulations and the tariff

orders notified by the Authority, for providing signals of all its pay channels to the distributor of television
channels-
(a) within sixty days of commencement ofthese regulations; and
(b) before launching of a pay channel.
and simultaneously submit, for the purpose of record, a copy of the same to the Authority.

(2) The-reference
. interconnection offer, referred to in sub-regulation (I), shall contain the technical and
commercial terms and conditions relating to, including but not limited to, maximum retail price per month of

pay channel, maximum retail price per month of bouquet of pay channels, discounts, if any, offered on the

maximum retail price to distributors, distribution fee, [manner of calculation of 'broadcaster's share of maximum

retail price', genre of pay channel and other necessary conditions:

Provided that a broadcaster may include in its reference interconnection offer, television channel or
bouquet of pay channels of its subsidiary company or holding company or subsidiary company of the
holding company, which has obtained, in its name, the downlinking permission for its television
channels from the Central Government, after written authorization by them.

Explanalion: For the purpose of these regulations, the definition of "subsidiary company" and "holding
company" shall be the same as assigned to them in the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of2013).

(3) Every broadcaster shall declare a mil~inlumtwenty percent of the maximun~retail price of pay channel or
bouquet of pay channels, as the case may be, as the distribution fee:

Provided that the distribution fee declared by the broadcaster shall be uniform across all the distribc:ion
platforms.

Page 12 of 110
(4) It shall be permissible !o a broadcaster to offer discoun~s,on the maximum retail price of pay channel or
bouquet of pay channels, to distributors of relevision channels, not exceeding fifteen percent of the maximum
retail price:

Provided that the sum of distribution fee declared by a broadcaster under sub-regula~ion (3) and
discounts offered under this sub-regularion in no case shall exceed thirty five percent of tlie maxinium
retail price of pay channel or bouquet of pay channels, as the case may be:

Provided furtl~rrthat offer of discounls, if any, to distributors of television channels, shall be on the
basis of fair, transparent and non-discriminatory :erms:

Provided also that the parameters of discounts shall be measurable and computable.

( 5 ) Every broadcaster of pay channel shall mention in io reference interconnection offer the names of persons,
telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses designated to receive request for receiving interconnection from
distributors of television channels and grievpnce redressal thereof.

(6) The terms and conditions mentioned in [lie reference interconnection offer st,all include all necessary and
sufficient pro\~isions, which make it 2 complete interconncction agreement on signing by other party, for
distribution of television channcls.
. .
(7) The Authority. suo-motu or orhenvise, may examinc the reference interconnection offer submitted lby a
broadcaster and on examination if the Authority is of the opinion that tlie reference interconnection offer is not
in conformance wirh the ?revisions of the regulations and the tariff orders notified by the Authority, it may,
after giving an opportunity of being heard to such broadcaster, direct such broadcaster to modify the said
1refe1,ence interco!~nec:ion offer and such broadcilster shall amend reference interconnection offer accordingly
and publish the same within fiftecn days of receipt of the direction. s

(8) Any amendment 10 the reference interconnection offer sl~allbe published in tlie same manner as 7rovided
under the sub-regulations (:), (2), (31, (4), ( 5 ) and (6) of this regulation.

(9) In tlie event of any amendment to the reference interconnection offer by a broadcaster, under subregulation
(8), the broadcaster shall givc an option to all distributors, with witom it has written interconnection agreements
in piace, within thirty days from the date of such amendmen: and it shall be pe:missible to such distributors to
enter into fresh interconnection agreement in accordance with the amended reference interconnection offer,
within thirty days from the date of receipt of such option, or continue with the existing interconnection
agreelllent.

Page 13 of 110
8. Publication of reference interconnection offer by distributor of television channels.- (1) Every
dis~ributorof televisiot: channels shall publish, on its website, reference interconnection offer, in conformance
with the regulations and the tarifforders notified by the Authority, for carrying channels-
(a) within sixty days of commencement of these regulations; and
(b) before staning a new distribution nenvork:
and simultaneously submit, for the purpose of record, a copy of the same to the Authority.

Providcd that such reference interconnection offer shall be applicable only in the cases where a
broadcaster rrquests a distributor of te!evision channels to carry the broadcaster's channels on the
distribution network.

( 2 ) The reference interconnection offer, referred to in sub-regulation (I), shall contain the technical and
commcrcial terrris and conditions relating to, including but not limited to, target market, rate of carriage fee per
tnonth, average active subscriber base of standard definition set top boxes and high definition set top boxes at
the time of publication of the rrference interconnection offeer, discounts, if any, offered on the rate of carriage
fee, manner of calculation of carriage fer payable to the distributor and other necessary conditions:

Provided that the rate of carriage fee per standard definition channel per subscriber per month to be
declared by a distributor oftelevision channeis shall not exceed twenty paisa:

Provided filrther that the rat< of carriage fee per high definition channel per subscriber per montli to be

.declared by a disiributor of television chantiels shall not exceec forty paisa:

-
Provided also that a distributor of lelevision channels shall calculate the carriage fee amount for
television channels as per thc provisions specified in the Schedule 1, which shall change with the
changes in monthly subscription percentage of such television cliannels.

(3) I1 shall be permissible to a distributor of television channels to offer discoun!~

. to broadcasters on the rate of

carriage fee which shall not exceed thirty five percent of the rate of carriage fee declared under subregulation
(2):

Provided that offer of discounts, if any, to broadcaster on [lie carriage fee, shall be on the basis of fair,
transparent and non-discriminatory terms:

Provided further that the parameters of discounts shall be measurable and computable:

Provided also that i t shall be permissible for a distributor of television channels to offer diseounts
exceeding thirty tive percent of the rate of carriage fee declared under sub-regulation (2) for the
channel specified by the Authority, through a direction, in the public interest.

Page 14 of 110
(4) Every distributor o f tele\.ision channels shall, in its reference interconnection offer, mention the names i f
persons, telepllone numbers, and e-mail addresses, designated for receiving interconnection requests from

broadcasters and grievance redressal thereof.

( 5 ) The terms and conditions mentioned in the reference interconnection offer shall include all necessary and
sufficient provisions, which make it a complete interconnection agreement for signing by other party, for
carrying television channels.

(6) The Authority, suo-moiu or otherwise, may examine the reference interconnection offer submitted by a
distributor of television channels and on examination i f the Authority is of the opinion that the referenre
interconnection offer has not been prepared in conformance with the provisions of the regulations and the t ~ r i f f

orders notified by the Authority, it may, after giving an opportunity o f being heard to such distributor, direct

such distributor to modify the said reference interconnection offer and such distributor shall amend reference

interconnection offer accordingly and publish the same n'ithin fifteen days o f receipt of the direction.

(7) Any amendment to the reference interconnection offer shall be published in the same manner as provided
under the sub-regulation (I), [2), (3), (4) and ( 5 ) of this regulation.

(8) In tl~eevent of any amendment in the reference interconnection offer by a distributor of television cl~annc!~
under sub-regulation (7), the distributor shall given an option to all broadcasters, \\~ith\vholn it has written
interconnection agreements in place, within thirty days from the date of such amendment and it shall be
permissible to such broadcasters to enter into fresh interconnection agreements in accordance with the amended

reference interconnection offer within tlii~tydays lrorn the date o f receipt of such option or continue with the

existing inrerconnection agreements.

Page 15 of 110
 CHAPTER I V

INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT

9. General provisions relating to interconnection agreements.- ( I ) It shall be mandatory for service

providers to reduce the terms and condirions o f all their interconnection agreements to writing.

(2) A service provider siiall not incorporate any provision in the intercomection agreement with the other
C ' ,
: :I service provider which \vould require, directly or indirectly, the latter to pay a minimum guaranteedamount and
any agreement to contrary shall be void.

(3) It shall be mandatory for service providers to eirher renew or amend all their existing interconnection
agreements in compliance with tile provisions of the regulations and the tariff orders notitied by the Authority,
within one hundred and fifty days of commencement ofthese regulations.

10, interconnection agreement behvecn broadcaster and distributor o f television channels.- (I) No
broadcaster shall provide signals o f pay channels to a distributor of television channels without entering into a
written inrerconnection agreement with such disrributol. of television channels.

(2) No distributor of television channels shall distribute pay channels of any broadcaster witliout entering into a
written interconnection agreement \\'ith such broadcaster.

(3) It shdl be mandatory for a broadcaster and a dislributor of television channels to enter into written
interconnection agreement on a-la-cane basis for distribution of pay channels.

(4) Every broadcaster shall devise alt application form for request o f signals o f television channel by distributors
of television channels in accordance with the Schedule 11.

( 5 ) A distributor of teievision channels desirous of obtaining signals of television channcls shall make a written
request in the application form dev~sedby the broadcaster.

(6) Every distributor of television channcls before requesling signals of television channels from a broadcaster
shall ensure that the addressable systems to be used for distribution of tele\,ision channels meet the requirements
as specitied in the Schedule Ill.

(7) I f a broadcaster, before providing signals of television channels, is of the opinion that the addressable
system, being used by the distributor for distribution o f television channels, does not meet he requiremcnls
specified in the Schedule Ill,i t may, withour prejudice to the rime limit specified in sxb-regulation ( 2 ) o f the
regulation 3, cause audit of the addressable system of the distributor by MIS.Broadcast Engineering Consultants

Page 16 of110
lndia Limited, or any other auditor empanelled by the Authority for conducting such audit and provide a copy o f
the repon prepared by tlie auditor to the distributor:

Provided that unless the configuration or the version of the addressable system of the distributor has
been changed after issuance of the repon by the auditor, the broadcaster, before providing signals o f
television channel shall not cause audit of the addressable system of the distributor i f the addressable
system of sucli distributor has been audited during the last one year by MIS.Broadcast Engineering
Consultants India Limited, or any other auditor empanelled by the Authority and the distributor
produces a copy of such report as a proof of conformance to the requirements specified in the Schedule
[[[.

(8) Every broadcaster of pay chamel, within thirty days of receipt o f written request from a distributor of
television channels, shall Fnter into a written interconnection agreement with the distributor o f television
channels for providing signals of its pay channel in accordance with the terms and conditions of the reference
interconnection offer published by the broadcaster:

Provided that the 'broadcaster's share of maximum retail price' payable by a distributor of television
channels under the interconnection agreement shall be calculated on the basis o f the maximum retail
price of pay channel or bouquet, the distribution fee and the discounts agreed in the interconnectio~i
agreement:

P~ovidedfurther that the period of the interconnection agreement in no case shall be less than one year
from the date o f com~nencementof the agreement:

Provided also that in case more than one interconnection agreement are entered into with a distributor
in respect of television channel or bouquet of pay channels, each subsequent interconnection agreement
shall contain the details of the earlier agreements in force with that distributor for such channel or
bouquer, as the case may be. ..
-.

Erpla~ialion:For tlie removal of doubt, it is clarified that on receipt of a written request from a distributor by a
broadcaster for obtaining signals of pay channels, the written interconnection agreement, behveen the
broadcaster and the distributor, shall be entered into within thirty days o f receipt of sucl~request, and, the
broadcaster shall provide signals of its pay channels, within thirty days from the date of signing of wrinen
interconnection agreement, to tlic distributor of television channels.

(9) It shall be pcrniissible to a broadcaster to sign the interconncction agrecment with distributors of television
channels for a-la-carte pay channel or bouquet of pay channels o f its subsidiary company or holding company or
subsidiary company of the holding company, which has obtained, in its name, tlie downlinking permission for
its television channels from the Central Government, after wrinen authorization from such companies.

Page 17 of 110
(10) [t shall be permissible to a distributor of television channels to sign the reference interconnection offer
published by a broadcaster under sub-regulation ( I ) of regulation 7, as an interconnection agreement, for
obtaining signals of television channels and send the said agreement to the broadcaster for providing signals.

( I I) A broadcaster shall not incorporate any provision, directly or indirectly, in its interconnection agreement
with a distributor of television channels which require such distributor o f television channels to include the
channel or bouquet of pay channels offered by the broadcaster in any parlicular bouquet of channels offered by
such distributor to the subscribers and any agreement to contrary shall be void.

(I?) A broadcaster shall not incorporate any provision, directly or indirectly in its interconnection agreement
with a distributor of television channels which requires such distributor of television channels to give a
guarantee for a minimum subscriber base or a minimum subscription percentage for the channels offered by the
broadcaster and any agreement to contrary shall be void.

Explanarion: For removal of doubt. it is clarified that any discount, offered as an incentive by a broadcaster on
the maximum retail price of the pay channel or the bouquet o f pay channels, based on actual number of
subscribers or actual subscription percentage, recorded in a month shall not amount to guarantee for a minimum
subscriber base or a minimum subscription percentage for its channel.

(13) I t shall be the responsibility o f every broadcaster who enters into an interconnection agreement with a
distributorof television channels to hand over a copy of such interconnection agreement to that distributor of
television cl~annelswithin a period of fifteen days from the dare of esecution of the interconnection agreement
and retain a copy of an acknowledge~lientso obtained from the distributor.

(14) Every broadcaster shall enter into a new written interconnection agreement with distributor of television
channels before the expiry of the existing interconnection agreement:
-
..

Provided that the broadcaster shall, at least sixty days prior to the date of espiry o f the existing
interconnection agreement, give notice to tl~edistributor o f television channels to enter into new written
interconnection agreement:

Provided further that in case the parties fail to enter into new interconnection agreement before the
espiry of the exisling interconnection agreement, the broadcaster shall not make the signals of
television channels available to the distributor of television channels on expiry of the existing
interconnection agreement:

Page 18 of 110
 Provided also that the distributor of television channels sllall, fifteen days prior to [lie date of expiry of
its eyisting interconnection agreement. inform the subscribers through scrolls on the channels included
in the said agreement-
(a) the date of expiry of its existing interconnection agreement; and
(b) the date of disconnection of signals of television channels in the event of its failure to enter
into new interconnection agreement.

(15) No distributor of television channels shall carry television channels, for which a request has been received
from a broadcaster for distribution of television channels, ivitliout entering into a written interconnection
agreement with such broadcaster.

(16) Every distributor of television channels shall devise an application form, for seeking access to its
distribution network for distribution of television channels by broadcasrers, in accordance with the Schedule IV.

(17) A broadcaster desirous of distribution of its television channel shall make a written request in the
application form devised by the distributor of television channels.

(18) Every distributor of television channels, within thiny days of receipt of written request from a broadcaster
for distribution of television channels, shall enter into a written interconnection agreement with the broadcaster
for carrying lelevision channels in accordance with the terms and conditions of the reference interconnection
offer published by the distributor:
. -

Provided that the carriage fee payable by a broadcaster to the distributor of television channels under
the interconnection agreement sliall be calculated on the basis of the rate of carriage fee and the
discounts agreed in the interconnection agreement:

Provided funher thal the period of the interconnection agreement in no case shall be less than one year
from the date of co~nmencementof the agreement: -.
.

Provided also that in case more than one interconnection agreement are entered with a broadcaster in
respect of a television cliannel, each subsequent interconnecrion agreement shall contain the details of
tile earlier agreements in force wit11 that broadcaster for such channel.

Expioriaiiori: For the removal of doubt, it is clarified that on receipt of a written request from a broadcaster by a
distributor for carrying reievision channels, [he written interconnection agreement, between the distributor and
the broadcaster, shall be entered into witliin tliirty days of receipt of such request and, the distributor shall
distl.ibute television channels of such broadcaster's within thirty days, from the date of signing of written
interconnection agreement or from the date of availability of spare channel capacity on the distribution network,
whichever is later, through the distribution nehvork.

Page 19 of 110
 (19) It shall be permissible to a broadcaster to sign the reference interconnection offer published by a distributor
of television channels under sub-regulation (I) of regulation 8, as an interconnection agreement, for carrying
television cllannels and send the said agreement to such distributor for providing access to the distribution
networks.

(20) It shall be the responsibility of evtry distributor of television channels who enters into an interconnection
agreement a'ith a broadcaster to hand over a copy of written interconnection agreement to that broadcaster
within a period of fifteen days from the date of execution ofthe interconnection agreement and retain a copy af
an acknowledgement so obtained from the broadcaster.

(21) Every distributor of television cnanneis shall enter into a new written interconnection agreement, for
carrying television channels requested by a broadcaster, before the expiry of the existing interconnection
agreement:

Provided that the distriSutor oftelevision channels shall, at least sixty days priorto the date of expiry of
the existing interconnection agreemen[, give notice to the broadcaster to enter into new written
interconnection agreement:

Provided further that in case the parties fail to enter into new interconnection agreement before the
expiry af the existing interconnection agreement, :he distributor of television channels may not carry
such television channels on espiry of the exlsting interconnection agreement:

Provided further that a distributor of television channels shall not discontinue carrying a television
channel if the signals of such televisior, channel remain available for distribution and molithly
subscription percentage for that particular television channel is more than hrJenry percent of the
monthly averagr active subscriber base in the target market:

Provided also that if the distributor of television channels decides t e discontinue carrying a television
cllannel due to expiry of tlle existing interconnection agrcenlent, it shall, fifteen days prior to the date
of expiry of its existing interco~lnectionagreement, inform the subscribers through scrolls on the
channels included in [he said agreement-
(a) the date of expiry of irs existing interconnect;on agreement; and
(b) the date of disconnection ofsignals oTtele~,isionchannelsin the event ofits fail~reto enter
into new interco~ectionagreement.

11. Territory of interconnection agreement.- ( I ) The interconnection agreement signed Setween a

broadcaster and a multi-system operator shall include the following details for describing the territory for the
purpose of distribution of signals of television channels -- .
a

Page 20 of 110
 (a) the registered area of operation of the multi-system operator as mentioned in the registration granted
by the Central Government;
(b) the nanies o f specific areas for which distribution o f signals o f television channels lias been agreed,

initially, at tlie time of signing ofthe interconnection agreement; and

(c) tlie names of the col~espondingstatesi union territories in which such agreed areas as referred in
clause (b) of this sub-regulation are located.

( 2 ) It shall be permissible to the multi-system operator to distribute the channels beyond the areas agreed und?r
sub-regulation (I), by giving a written notice to the broadcaster, after thirty days from the date of receipt of such
written notice by the broadcaster and the said notice shall deemed to be an addendum to the existing
interconnection agreement:

Provided that such areas fall within-.

(a) the registered area of operation of the multi-system operator; and

(b) tlie states or union territories in whicli tlie multi-system operator has been permitted to

distribute the signals of television cliannels under the interconnection agreement.

(3) Nothing contained in subregulation (2) shall apply i f written objections with reasons from the broadczster
have been received by the multi-system operator during the said thirty days notice period:

Provided that any objection by the broadcaster, which is unreasonable, shall be deemed to consliiute a
denial of provisioning ofsignals beyond the areas agreed under the clause (b) of sub-regulation (I).

12. Interconnection agreement behveen distributor of television channels and local cable operator.- (I)
N o distributol. o f television channels shall provide signals of television channels to a local cable operator

witlioul entering into a written interconnection agreement \vith such local cable operator.

-
(2) No local cable operator shall distribution television channels of any broadcaster to any subscriber without
entering into a written interconnection agreemenr with a distributor of such television channels.

(3) Every multi-system operator shall, within thirty days of receipt of written request from a local cable
operator, enter into a written interconnection agreement with such local cable operator for providing signals of
lelevision channels, on lines o f the model interconnection agreement as set out in the Schedule V by mutually

agreeing on tlie clauses 10, 1 I and I ? of the said agreement:

Provided that the multi-system operator and the local cable operator, without altering or deleting any

clause of the model interconnection agreement, may add, tlirough mutual agreemenr, clauses to the
model interconnection agreement however such addition shall not have the effect o f diluting any of tlie
clauses as laid down in the model interconnection agreement:

Page 21 of 110
 Provided further that in case the multi-system operator and the local cable operator fail to enter into
interconnectio> agreement, the multi-sysfem operator and the local cable operator shall enter into the
standard interconnection agreemenr as specified in the S:hedu!e VJ.

Explanation: For removal of doubt, it is clarified that in the event o f any conflict between the terms and
conditions of the model interconnection agreement and new terms and conditions added through mutual
agreement by the parties, the terms and conditions o f the prescribed model interconnection agreement shall
prevail.

(41 Every multi-system operator, upon entering into a written interconnection agreement with a local cable
operator, shall provide signals of television channels, within tliirty days o f entering into the written
in:erconnection agreement, to such local cable operator.

(5) It shall be the responsibility of every multi-system operator who enters into an interconnection agreement
with a local cable operator to handover a copy o f such agreement to that local cable operator within a period of
fifteen days from the date o f execution o f the agreement and retain a copy o f an acknowledgement so received
from the local cable operator.

(6) Every multi-system operator shall enter info a new written interconnection agreement with local cable
operator before tlie expiry o f the existing interconnection a,Oreement:

Provided that the multi-system operator shall, at least sixty days prior to the date of expiry of the
existing interconnection agreement, give notice to the local cable operator to enter into new written
interconnection agreement:

Provided funl~ertl~atin case, the parties fail to enter into new written interconnection agreement before
the expiry of the existing interconnection agrecmenr, the distributor shall not make available the signais
of television channels to the local cable operator on expiry of the exzting interconnection agreement:

Provided also that the mu:ti-systenl operator sball, fifteen days prior to the date of expiry of its existing
interconnection agreement, inform the subscribers th~oughscrolls on the channels included in the said
agreement-
(a) the date of expiry of its existing interconnection agreement; and
(b) the dare o f disconnection ofsignals oftclevision channels in the event o f its failure to enter
into new iliterconnection agreement.

(7) The settlement of service charges between local cable operator and multi-system operator shall be governcd
by murual agreement:

Page 22 of 110
 Provided that in cases the multi-system operator and the local cable operator fail to arrive at a mutual
agreenient for senlenient of service charges, then the network capacity fee amount and the distribution
fee amount shall be shared in tile ratio of 5 5 4 5 between multi-system operator and local cable
operator.

(8) The provisions of subregulations (3), (J), (9,

(6) and (7) of this regulation shall, with necessary adaptations
and modifications, apply to HITS operator and IPTV operator.

13. Non-Applicability to DTH operator.- Nothing contained in the regulations I I and 12 shall apply to a
DTH operator.

Page 23 of 110
 CHAPTER V
SUBSCRIPTION REPORT AND AUDIT

14. Subscription report 2nd monthly fee.- ( I ) Every distributor o f television channels shall, within seven

days from the end o f each calendar month, provide, in the format specified in the Schedule VII, complete and

accurate monthly subscription report of channels and bouquets of pay channels, to the broadcasters, with whom
the written interconnection agreements have been entered into for distribution o f channels:

Provided that it shall be permissible to a broadcaster to disconnect the signals of its television channel
after giving written notice of three weeks to the distributor i f the distributor fails to provide the montKy
subscription report under this regulation.

(2) On the basis of monthly subscription report, the broadcaster shall issue monthly invoice to the distributor for
'broadcaster's share of maximum retail price' payable by such distributor to the broadcaster and such invoice

shall clearly specify the current payment dues and arrears, if any, along with the due date for payment:

Provided that the broadcaster shall allow a time period of at least fifteen days to the distributor of
television channels for making payment from the date of receipt of invoice by tlie distributor:

Provided further thar i n case the distributor fails to provide the monthly subscription report within the
period of seven days from the end of the calendar month, the broadcaster shall have the right to raise a
provisional invoice, for an anloun! increased by ten percent of h e 'broadcaster's share of maximum
retail price' payable by the distributor to the broadcaster for the immediate preceding montll, and the

distributor shall be under obligation to make the payment on the basis of such provisional invoice:

Provided also that it shall be mandatory for the broadcaster and the distributor to carryout
reconciliation, betweer the provisional invoice and the final invoice raised by the broadcaster on the
basis o f the monthly subscription report sent by the distributor, within
-. three months from the date of

issue of such provisional invoice.

(3) Every distributor of television channels shall issue monthly invoice to the broadcasters, with whom the
written interconnection agreements have been entered into for carrying channels, for payment of the carriage fee
payable by such broadcaster along with the average active subscriber base in the target market in the month and
the nlontllly subscription report for tile channel o f the broadcaster carried by the distributor o f television

channels in the format specified in the Schedule VII and such invoices shall clearly specify the current payment

dues and arrears, if any, along with the due date for payment:

Provided that the distributor shall allow a time period of at least fifteen days to tlie broadcaster for
making payment from the date of receipt of invoice by the broadcaster.

Page 24 of 110
I Audit.- ( I ) Every distributor of television channels shall, once in a calendar year, cause audit of its
subscriber management system, conditional access system and other related systems by an auditor to verify that
the monthly subscription reports made available by the distributor to the broadcasters are complete, true and
correct, and issue an audit report to this effect to each broadcaster with whom it has entered into an
interconnection agreement:

Provided that the Authority may empanel auditors for the purpose of such audit and it shall be
mandatory for every distributor of television channels to cause audit, under this sub-regulation, kom
anyone of such empanelled auditors:

Provided further that any variation, due to audit, resulting in less than zero point five percent of the
billed amount shall not require any revision of the invoices already issued and paid.

(2) In cases, where a broadcaster is not satisfied with the audit report received under subregulation ( I ) or, if in
the opinion of a broadcaster the addressable system being used by the distributor does not meet requirements
specified in the Schedule 111, it shall be permissible to the broadcaster, after communicating the reasons in
writing to the distributor, to audit the subscriber management system, conditional access system and other
related systems of the distributor of television channels, not more than once in a calendar year:

Provided that the Authority may empanel auditors for the purpose of such audit and it shall be
mandatory for every broadcaster to cause audit, under this sub-regulation, from anyone of such
empaneled auditors:

Provided further that if sucli audit reveals that additional aniount is payable to the broadcaster, the
distributor shall pay such amount, along with the interest at the rate specified by the broadcaster in the
interconnection agreement, within ten days and if such amount including interest due for any period
exceed the amount reported by the distributor to be due for such period by two percent or more, the
distributor shall bear the audit expenses, and take necessary actions Q avoid occurrence of such errors
in the future:

Provided also that it shall be permissible to the broadcaster to disconnect signals of television channels,
after giving written notice of three weeks to the distributor, if such audit reveals that the addressable
system being used by the distributor does not meet the requirements specified in the Schedule 111.

(j) Every distributor of television channels shall offer necessary assistance to auditors so that audits can be
completed in a time bound manner.

Page 25 of 110
 CHAPTER VI
MISCELLANEOUS

16. Change in the m a r i n ~ u mretail price and the nature of a channel.- Every broadcaster, before making
any change, in the maximum retail price of the pay channel or the bouquet of pay charnels, or in the nature of
the channel, as the case may be, declared under the tariff order notified by the Authority, shall follow the
provisions of these regulations including but not limited to the provisions pertaining to publication of reference
interconnection offer by broadcasters of pay channels.

17. Disconncction of signals of television channels.- No service provider shall disconnect the signals of
television channels without giving at least three w e e k ' notice in writing to other service provider, clearly
specifying the reasons for the proposed disconnection:

Provided that the period of three weeks' notice shall start from the date of receiving the notice by the
other service provider:

Provided further that the distributor of television channels shall, fifteen days prior to the date of
disconnection, inform the subscriber, through scrolls on the channels proposed to be disconnected, the
date of disconnection of signals of such television channels:

Provided also that no service provider shall display notice for disconnection of signals of television
channels in form of static images overlaid on the television screen, obstructing normal viewing of the
subscribers.

18. Listing of channels in electronic progralnme guide.- ( I ) Every broadcaster shall declare the genre of its
channels and such genre shall be either 'Devotional' or 'General Entertainment' or 'Infotainment' or 'Kids' or
'Movies' or 'Music' or 'News and Current Affairs' or 'Sports' or 'Miscellaneous'.
-
(2) It sliall be mandatory for the distributor to place charnels in the electronic programme guide, in such a way
that tlle television channels of same genre, as declared by the broadcasters, are placed together consecutively
and one channel shall appear at one place only:

Provided that all television channels of same language within the same genre shall appear together
consecutively in the electronic programme guide:

Provided further that i t shall be permissible to the distributor to place a channel under sub-genre within
the genre declared for thechannel by tile broadcaster.

Page 26 of 110
(3) Every distributor of television channels sl~allassign a unique channel number for each television channel
available on the distribution nehvork.

(4) The channel number once assigned to a paiticular television channel shall not be altered by the distribstor
fol. a period ofat least one year from the date of such assignment:

Provided that this sub-regulation shall not apply in case the channel becomes unavailable on the
distribution network:

Provided further that i f a broadcaster changes the genre of a channel then the channel number assigned
to that particular television channel shall be changed to place such channel together with the channels
of new genre in the electronic program guide.

19. Details of servicc providers.- (I) The Authority may, in order to protect the interest of the consumer or
service provider or to promote and ensure orderly growth of the broadcasting and cable television sector or for
monitoring and ensuring compliance of these regulations, by order or direction, specify website for the purpose
ofrepotting of the details by service providers.

(2) Every service provider shall report, its name, address, contact number, e-mail address and license/
permission/ registration details issued by the Central Government on the website specified by the Authority,
within thirty days from the date of commencement of these regulations or within thiny days from tke
specification of website for the purpose, whichever is later.

(3) Any service provider, who commences its operations after coming into effect of these regulations shall
report, its name, address, contact number, e-mail address and license1 permissiod registratio11 details issued by
the Central Government oil the websitc specified by the Authority, within thirty days from the date of
commencement of its operations or within thirty days from the specification of website for the purpose,
whichever is later. .

(4) It shall be mandatory for a service provider to verify, from the website specified by the Authority, that tile
service provider seeking interconnection for providing signals of television channels or access to the network, as
the case may be, has reported its details under sub-regulation (2) and sub-regulation (3):

Provided that this sub-regulation shall be applicable in the event of the Authority specifying such
website.

20. Designation of compliance officer and his obligations.- (1) Every broadcaster and distributor of
television channels shall, within thirty days from the date of commencement of these regulations, designate a
compliance officer.

Page 27 of 110
(2) Every broadcaster arid distributor of television channels, who commences its operations after coming into
effect of these regulations, shall, within thirty days from the date of commencement of its operations, designate
a compliance officer.

(3) Every broadcaster or distributor of television channels, as [he case may be, shall, within thirty days from the
date of designation of the compliance officer under the provisions of this regulation, furnish to the Authoriy the
namc, complete address, contact number and e-maii address of the compliance officer along with authenticated
copy of ihe board's resolution authorizing the designation of such compliance officer:

Provided that the distributor of television channels, which is not a company, shall, wilhin thirty days
from the date ofdesignation of the compliance officer under the provisions of this regulation, furnish ;o
the Authority the name, full address, contact number and e-mail address of the compliance ofLcer
along with authenticated copy of the authorization letter authorizing the designa:ion of such
compliance officer.

(4) In the event of any change in the name of the compliance officer so designated under provisions of this
regulation, the same shall be reported to the Authority by the service provider within tlurty days from tlie date of
occurrence of such change along with authenticated copy of the board's resolution or authorization letter, as the
case may be.

( 5 ) In \he event of any change in thc address or contact number or email address of the compliance officer, the
same shall be reported to the Authority by the service provider within ten days from the date of occurrence of
. -
such change.

(6) The compliance officer shall be responsible for-

(a) generating awareness for ensuringcompliance with the provisions of these regulations;
(b) reporting to the Authority, with respect to compliance with these regulations and directions of the
Authority issued under these regulations; and
(c) ensuring that proper procedures have been established and are being followed for compliance of the-e
regulations.

(7) The provisions contained in the sub-regulation (6) shall b e in addition to the liability of the service provider
to comply with the requirements laid down under these regulations.

21, Intervention by the Authority.- The Authority may, in order to protect the interest of the consunler or
service provider or to promote and ensure orderly growth of the broadcasting and cable television sectoror for
nionitoring and ensuring compliance of these regulations, by order or direction, intervene, from lime to time.

22. Repeal a n d saving.- ( I ) The Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection
(Digital Addressable Cable Television Systems) Regulations, 2012 are hereby repealed.

Page 28 of 110
(2) The Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection Regulation, 2004, to the extent
they are applicable to addressable systems, are hereby repealed.

(3) Notwithstanding the repeal of regulations mentioned, under sub-regulation ( I ) and sub-regulation (2) of this
regulation, anything done or any action taken or proposed to have been done under the said regulations shall be
deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provision of these regulations.

(Sudhir Gupta)
Secretary TRAl

Note.-The Explanatory Memorandum explains the objects and reasons of the Teleco~nmunication
(Broadcasting and Cable) Services Interconnection (Addressablq Systelns) Regulations, 2017.

Page 29 of 110
 chamel. Further. the carriage fee payment must decrease with the increase in the subscription level of a
channel even before reaching 20% penerration level as the network capacity fee paid by subscribers also
contributes towards recovering the retransmission expenses.

83. For ease of computation, the Autliority has decided that in a given month, if the monthly subscription of
the channel reaches 5% or more hut beow 10°h, of the lnonthly average active subscriber base of the
DPO in target market: there sliould be, a reduction of 25% in carriage fee amount payable by the
broadcaster in that month and, a reduction of 50% in carriage fee amount in case the monthly
subscriplion of the channel reaclies 10% or more but below 159'0 of the nionthly average actil'e
subscriber base and, a reduction of 75% in carriage fee amount in case the monthly subscription of the
channel reaches 15% or more but below 2Oo4 of the monthly average active subscriber base. If the
monthly subscription o i c h a ~ e reachcs
l 20% of montllly average subscriber base in a given month, then
the DPO shall not charge any carriage fee for that month.

94. The Authority observed that, a cha~inelreaches lo all the subscribcrs in the geographical area covered by
a particular head end or the earth station installed by a DPO. Therefore, it is iegitimate expectation on the
part of DPOs to calcula:e the carriage fee alnount by cons~deringthe monthly average active subscriber
base of the lhead end or the earth station. The Authority also observed that a particular head end covers
more than one state and therefore restricting the target market area to \he boundaries of state will not be
reasonable. Therefore, tlle Authority has decided that every DPO sliall declare coverage area of each
distribution nehvork head end wise or E a h station wise as a target market. However, to meet thc
specific needs, it shall be perntissible for a distributor to declare, in non-discriminatory manner, any area
within the coverage area of distribution network(s) as a target market(8).

95. In respect of HD channel, the Authority observed that the HD channels can be seen only if a subscriber's
STB is capablc of receiving HD signals. Therefore, for carriage of HD channels the average active
subscriber base of the distributor, capable of receiving HD TV channels should be considered.
Accordingly provision has bcen made in thc regulation that for arriving the carriage fee of HD channels,
the average active subscriber base of the DPO in that month in the target market shall be of subscribers
capable of receiving high definition television channels, R e apprehension expressed by some
broadcasters in their comments that the DPOs will not allow channel reach beyond 20% for their own
carriage benefits is not tenable as it is in the interes! of DPOs to get more network capacity fee and
subscription fee from distribuiion of channels. Moreover, if the channel is attractive, the subscriber
would like to subscribe such channels. The DPOs cannot deny subscriber choice.

Placement
s.

96. In addressable systems, the technology provides for an Electronic Program Guide (EPG) wherein the
channels being carried on a DPO's ne&,orlt can be arranged in a simple and easy to understand manner
so that the subscriber can easily go through this guide and select the channel of choice instead of flipping
through all the channels. In the draft interconnection Regulations, 2016, the DPOs were mandated to list
all the channels available on tile platform in the EPG, in such a manner that a consumer can easily select
the channel of its choice. Tlle gtnre and language wise listing of TV channels in the EPG was proposed
in the draft Interconnection Regulations, 2016 to ensure placement of a channel among similar channels.
Further, in the draft, it was proposed [hat tlie broadcaster cannot put any pre-condition for providing
signals to the DPOs to place his channels at a particular position in the EPG or to assign a particular
number to his c h a ~ : l as such stipula!ion may not be practically possible to implement. For example, if
any two broadcasters insist for same position in the EPG as a pre-condition beforc providing signals of
their TV channels then it is not practically possible for a DPO to meet the prc-condition.

97. In response, most of thc broadcasters opinedthar the placement of channels and placement fee should be
brought undcr the ambit of regulatory framework. As per them, non regulated placement and marketing

Page 98 of 110
 fee makes the model non-transparent and create a back door entry by allowing negotiated agreements
behveen DPOs and broadcasters for LCN.

98. I n these regulations the broadcasters have been given a complete freedom to declare the genre of their
channels and in terms of the regulations, it has been mandated that a DPO shall place the channels in the
EPG under the respective genres so declared by the broadcasters. Further i t lias also been mandated that
DPOs shall place the channels of the same genre in such a manner that all TV channels of same language
within the same genre shall appear together consecutively in the EPG. In order to curb the practice to
frequently change LCN number: it has been mandated that LCN number once allocated will not be
changed for duration of at least one year. Therefore, the placements of channels have been adequately
regulated and necessary protection has been granted to the broadcaster so that their channels are not
placed ar any disadva~itageous position in the EPG. Hence as such there is no requirement ior a
broadcaster for asking for a specific position in the EPG.

99. In the new regulatory framework, empliasis has been increased on consumer choice. Therefore, when
consumers will choose only selected channels which they actually want to view, the importance of
placement of channel reduces drastically. Further, in the regulatory framework, the carriage and
placement lhave been clearly distinguished. The carriage fee as per demand of the stakeholders has been
regclated and lnust carry provisions would ensure the access to the distribution networks in non-
discriminatory manner. Earlier, these two kinds o f fees were clubbed togetl~erby service providers and
non payment of combined fee could have denied a channel the access to the nehvork. Now the samc will
not be possible. Mandating provision for discount within ceiling o f 15% for allocation o f placement or
LCN as some percentage of channel price (MRf') may qot serve tlie purpose as it will create a non level
playing field for pay channels vis-a-vis FTA charnels as in case of FTA channels the MRP is nil.
However, in case, a broadcaster still wishes to place its channel at a particular position or a specific
number assigned to its chamel, subject to the provisions of these regulations, tho broadcaster may offer
discount within the prescribed framework or pay the mutually agreed fee, after signing the
interconnection agreement, lo a distributor for placing the channel. I t is important to note Ihere that such
inte~connectionagreements, signed for placement of channels, shall also be non-discriminatory, Such
agreements, i f any, shall be appended with the main interconnection agreement and would be tiled with
the Auihority as per the regulatians notified by the Aurhorily from time to time. It will ensure the
transparency.

100. I t is noted that in the comments received from the stakeholders and the agreements entered by servicc
providers, varied terms like marketing fee, bandwidth support fee, channel visibility fee etc. are used for
different purposes and commercial arrangements between broadcasters and DPOs. Any such commercial
arrangement is a type o f interconnection agreement and therefore it bas to be on non-discriminatory
basis. Therefore, to avoid the regulatory gaps, it has been mandated that in case more than one
interconnection atreenlent are entered witli a distributor of television channels i n respect of television
channel(s) or bouquet(s) of pay channels, each subsequent interconnection agreement shall contain ihe
details of the earlicr agreements in force with that distributor for such cha~el(s)or bouquet(s).

101. It is also observed that many times a fee in the name of marketing i s paid by a service provider to other
service provider for the promotion and advertisement of its services. Sometimes broadcasters provide
incentives lo the distributors for inclusion of channels in the bouquets offered by the DPO in the name of
marketing. In these regulations, the Authority has clearly mandated that no incentive, in whatsoever
name, can be given by the broadcaster to the DPO for inclusion of i t s channels in the DPO's bouquet
because i t results in pushing of channels to [he subscribers. The marketing fee towards promotion and
advenisemenr of services contributes towards increase in business which i s due to the effort of the two
parties. Therefore, there cannot be a specific parameter for regulating such fee. Hence, at this stage, any
regulation by Autliority on such fee is bound to be a porous regulation. Still the Authority has permitted

Page 99 of 110
 that a service provider may offer transparent discount to the other service prov~derout of the limit of
15% if it is mutually ageed. Ho\vever it has been dccided that any agreement, for any kind of fee for a
channel, behveen t\vo service providers should be made part of interconnection agreement and reported
to the Author~tyto enable the Authority to moniror the industry practices.

Audit of Addressable System before Provisionine of S i ~ n a l s

102. The Authority in its earlier regulatory framework had prescribed technical audit methodology before
probisioning of signals. In the CP, i11e issues in the current ~nethodologyof technical audit of addressable
systems and need to review them were discussed.

103. In response to CP, broadcasters opined that before any license is granted by MIB a mechanism should be
introduced to ensure that any applicant seeking license to operate is completely compliant ofaddressable
system requirements. A DTH aperator commented that the responsibility of audit lies with the
broadcaster however such audit should be restricted to once a year and added that technical audit for each
new chamel should not be conducted every time. Another DTH operator stated that if the broadcaster
intends to do the technical audit, it should be done either after providing the channel or simultaneously,
and opined that TRAI or TDSAT or appropriate forum should take action against erroneous parties.
Some DPOs opined that onus o f audit should not lie with braadcasters and suggested that TRAl can
publish a list of authorized auditors who can be approached by DPOs to gct its CAS and SMS
independently verified. Some DPOs commented that broadcaster should be mandated to complete audit
within 15 days else issue IRDs after signing the interconnect agreement within next 15 days. An MSO
and an L C 0 association stated that if a platform is inspected by BEClLlauthorized agency, then no
objections should be raised however, if no such inspection is done, broadcasters should audit in 30 days.
Taking into account of tile suggestions and concerns of the stakeholders certain clauses were poposed in
the draft Interconnection Regulations, 20 16.

104. In response to the draft Interconnection Regulations, 2016, broadcaster association stated that the
broadcaster should be given the right to conduct the audit of the technical systems of DPOs through its
own technical team; BECIL or empanelled auditor may be a?pointed only in case of dispute behveen the
parties. They have argued that DPOs can take advantage and tamper with the systems later on the pretext
that therc systems are audited by BECIL and in terms of draR regulations the same cannot be challenged
by broadcaster since it is valid for a period of one year. Some broadcasters commented that Audits
should be conducted quarterly and not limited to once a year, to bring in 0% discrepancy and
transparency in the system. While another broadcaster submitted that 1st Audit should be conducted in
presence of broadcas:er representative by an Audit firm decided by IBF or any broadcaster industry
body. -? .

105. The Audit of the systems of DPO is necessary to ensure that the systems deployed by a DPO are
addressable as per the regulatory requirement. T o ensure that the audit does not delay the process of
getting iignals of T V channels, it is desirable that the DPO ensures that the addressable system installed
by it meets t l ~ erequirements specified in regulations. It is also important that the broadcaster assure itself
that the addressable systems o f the DPO meet the minimum requirement as specified in the regulatory
framework. In order to balance the requiremen~sof broadcasters and DPOs, the Authority is of the view
that the onus of carrying out audit should lie with the broadcaster, however, to ensure that the audit
should not delay the process of providing of signals of TV channels, a mechanism needs to be devised.
Accordingly, suitable provisions have been brought in these regulations. These are explained in the
following paragraph

106. T o speed u p tlie process of auditing, the Authority has decided that it may specify a panel of auditors
from which broadcasters may choose any one. Once a distribution system is audited and certified by an
empanelled auditor, it is only logical that orher broadcasters will also have to accept the same for at least

Page 100 of 110

TIC
 TELECOM REGULATORY AlJTHGRlTY O F INDIA
Government of lndia

DIRECTION

Dated: 8Ih November, 2017

Subject: Direction to Broadcasters and Distributor of Television

Channels, under section 13, read with sub-clauses (ii) of clause (b) of
sub section (1) of section 11, of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of
India Act, 1997, relating to display of television channels on landing
LCN.

NO. 12-3712017-B&CS.--- Whereas the Telecom Regulatory Authority of

lndia [hereinafter referred to as the Authority'], established under sub-
section (1) of section 3 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of lndia Act,
1997 (24 of 1997) [hereinafter referred to as 1'RAI Act. 19971, has been
entrusted to discharge certai~ifunctio~is,which inter-alia, include to r e g ~ ~ l a t e
the teleconimunication services; fix the terms and conditions of inter-
connectivity between the service providers; ensure technical compatibility
and effective inter-connection between different service providers; lay-down
the standards of quality of service to be provided by the service providers
and ensure the quality of service and conduct the periodical survey of sucli
service provided by the service providers so as to protect interest of tile
consumers of telecommunication services;

2. And whereas the Central Government, in the Ministry of Communication

and Information Technology (Department of Telecommunications), vide its
~r~otification
No.39;:-
(a) issued in exercise of powers conferred upon the Central Government
proviso to clause (k) of sun-section.(l) of section 2 of tlie TRAl Act, 1997
and
(b) published under notification number S.0.44(E) dated the 9th January.
2004 in the Gazette of lndia, Extraordinary, Part 11, Section 3 - sub-section
(ii)---
has notified broadcasting services and cable services to be
telecommunication service;
3. And whereas the TRAl Act envisages to promote and ensure orderly
growth of the sector.

4. And whereas the sub-clause (ii) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section
11 of the TRAl Act provides to fix the terms and conditions of
interconnectivity between the service providers;
0 11 2-
5 And vihereas szcton : 3 o' the T R A ACI, 1997 read wiih n o t t c a t o n
No.39 cf the C6ntral Governnient, Iviinistl-i/ of Communication and
Infornlation Technology (Department of Telecornmunications), ernpcwers
tile Authority to issue directions for discharye of its functions in the
broadcasting and cable sector, arid the same reads as under:

"The Authority may, for the discharge o f its functions under

sub-seciion (I) of section I I issue such directions from time
to time to the se~viceprov~ders,as it may consider necessary:

Provided that n o direction under sub-section (4) o f section 12

o r under this section shall be issued except on the matters
specified it? clause (6) o f subsection (7) of section 71":

6. And ,whereas. in industry parlance, the landing channel or the landing

page refers to the Logical Channel Number (LCN) which is displayed first
when the set top box is switched on;

7. And whereas, the land~ngpage is, normally, used by the distributor of

television channels for providing ~nformationto consumers and promotion
of its distribution platforrrs;

8 . And whereas the Authority has received a number of representations

from stakeholders wherein it has been reported that the practice of placing
a registered satellite n/ channel, whose TV rating is released by TV rating
agency, on the Iaiiding page has the potential to affect the viewership data
of that channel, and therefore it is susceptibe to influence the televisior~
audience measurements I television ratings;

9.And whereas !he viewership data I television ratlng information of a

channel plays a vital roie in adverttser decisions and orderly growth of the
sector;

ID. And whereas the television ratings are given by the registered agency
under "Policy Guideiines for Television Rating Agencies in India' dated 76th
January, 2014 issued by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, and
the said guidelines were form~latedbased on recommendations of the
Authority;

3 1. And whereas the underlying spirit of policy guidelines for television

ratings in lndia is to have accurate, credible, transparent and representative.
TV audience measurement;

12. And whereas the Autlior~tyhas, on examination of the issue, reached

the conclusion that piacenlent of registered 1.V channel, whose TV rating is
released by TV rating agency, on landing page may affect the orderly
 1/21
growth of the sector and is against the spirit of the said policy guidelines for
TV ratings agencies and, therefore the sarne needs to be curbed, due to the
following:.

(i) such practice captures viewership impressions, which are not due to
natural choice of consumers, therefore susceptible to show highei television
rating to the channel involved in such practice;
(ii) such piactice is discrimiliatory in nature as it puts other broadcasters in
disadvantageous position leading to a non-level playing field in the TV
broadcasting sector and thus deviate from the basic ethos of
interconnection i . e non-discl-imination and level playing field;

(iii) such practice is susceptible to false viewership data which creates

market distortions; and

(iv) such practice is anti-consumer as it is against the rights of the consume

accurate information about the viewership of channels which plays a role in
choice of TV channels:

13. ~ n whereas
d fixing the terms of interconnectivity between the service
providers is one of the functioi~sentrusted upon the Authority and placing
of a channel on landing LCN is the issue relating to interconnectivity
between broadcaster and distr:butor of the television channel, therefore,
there is a need for intervention of the Authority in the matter;

14. Now, therefore, the Authority, in exercise of the powers conferred upon
it uncler section 13, read with sub-causes (iii of clause (b) of sub-section
(1) of section 11, of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (24
of 1997), in order to protect the interest of serLlce prov~dersand consulners
& ensure orclerly growth of the sector, directs all the broadcasters and
d~stributorsot televis~onchannels, to restram from placlng any registered
satellite television channel, whose TV rating is 'released by TV rating
agency, on the landing LCN or landing channel or boot up screen within
fifteen days from the date of issuance of this direction
Sdl-
(S.M.t<. Chandra)
J o i n t A d v i s o r (B&CS)

To,
All Broadcasters and Distributors of television channels

T R U E COPY
 Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
'TRA I

Consultation Paper
on
Issues related to Placing of Television ~ h a n n eon
i
Landing Page

New Delhi, India

3rr1 April,20 18

Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan

Jawahar La1 Nehru Marg
New Delhi- 1 10002
Website: \vwv.trai.gov.ill
-
 TABLEOFCONTENTS

Details
1 No.
Introduction
I
Issues related to Placing ol Television Channel 1 10
on Landing Paee 1
issues-for Consultation
List of Acronyms

Page 2 of 24
 -

Written Commeilts on the Coilsultation Paper are invited

from the stakeholders by 20[h April, 2018 a n d counter-
comments by 271'1 April, 2018. Comments a n d counter-
comments ~ l i l be posted on TRAI's website
The comments and counter-comments
~\!~\~:,trai..gov.i1i.
may be sent, preferably in electronic form, to
Sh. Anil Kumar Bhardwaj, Advisor (B&CS), Telecom
Regulatoiy Authority of India, on the e-mail:-
or smk.chanclrrL/Li~:trai.~ov.in
ad\lbcs-2/~itrai.gov.i11 For. any
clarification/ information, Sh. Anil Kumar Bhardwaj,
Advisor (B&CS) may be contacted a t Tel. No.: +91-11-
23237922, Fax: +9 1- 11-23220442.

Page 3 of 24
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

TRAI h a s been established vide The Telecoln Regulatory Authority of

India Act 1997'' to regulate the telecommunication services.
'Broadcasting scrvicc' \vas initially excludcd from thc definition of
'rclccommunication scrvicc' undcr Section 2(l.)(k]of the TRAI Act,
1997. However, vide an z ~ m e ~ ~ d m to
e nTrGI
t Act, in the year 2000, a
proviso \ras aclded to Section 2 ( l ) ( k ) , permitting the Central
Gove.rnment to notify any olher service a s lelecomm~~nication
service.
Pursuanl to illis power, Lhe Cenlral (iov~rnmenl,vide its notification
no. 39 dated 09.01.2004 notified %I-oadcasting service' as
'telecommunicatiol7ico service'.

1.2 The TRA1 Acl, enlrusls [he Teleccim Regulatory Authority of India
(hereinafter referred a s he Aulhority,), amongst others, the function to
ensure techr~ical compatibility and effective interconnection between
dil'i'crcnt scrvicc pro\liclcrs, fix rcrms and conditions of intcrconncction
and maintain registcr of Intcrconnecl. The first interconnection
regulat:ioll for broaclcasting sector namely the Teleco~nmunication
(Broadcasting and Cable Services] Interconnection Regulation, 2004'
was notified by TRAI on 10.12.2004 [hereinafter referred as
'Inlerconnecrion Regulations, 2004'). These were nolified to regulate
in~erconneclion a.~.rangemenls belween service providers of
broadcasting and cable services for re-transmission of signals in
..
analogue mode, in vogue at that time. From time to time, need arose to
clarify. a s wcll a s to cxpnrlti thc scopc of tlic Intcrconncction
Regulations, 2004 to i~icluticadtircssat~lcplatforms such as Direct to
Home (DTH], Head-end In The Sky (HITS), lnleriiet Protocol Television
( I V V ] eLc, The analogue cable TV systems had inherent limitations

Page 4 of 24
(3 such a s limited channel carrying capacity, limited choice to the
IIB
consumers and non-addressable nature oi the network. The evolution
ol technology [ ~ a v e d way lor bringing aboui digitization with
addressability ill the cable TV sector. Accordingly, alter studying the
subject a t length a n d undestalting a public collsultation process, the
on 5cl1 August 2010, gave its recommendations on
Pi~~thorit).:~
implerncntatiorl ol Digital Addressable Cable TV Systems (DAS) across
the country along with a roadlnap to achieve the same. DAS h a s
r s !he analog~iesysiem. I r ~lddressesthe issues
1nulLiple a d v ~ ~ n t a g over
ol capaciry conslraints ior distl.ibutor, provides consumers :nore choice
ol channels a n d better quaiiiy ol viercing etc. The Government issued
notilication dated 111Il November, 201 1 , which laid down the roadmap
iol- implcrnerltat~on of' tiigitizatiorl in cable tcievision section in four
phases starring from .lunc 2012. The Authority notified the
T e l e c o n ~ m ~ m i c a t i(Broaticasting
o~~ a n d Cable Services] Interconnection
(Digital iiddressable Cable Tclevisiol? Sysrems) Regulations, 2012 on
30[11 April, 2012 (hereinafter referred to a s 'Interconnection Regulations,
2012'1. Digitization in the cable sector was implemented in lour phases
and ir h a s been co~npleledall o\:er the counlry by 31st March 2017.
This enjoined the author-ity to work on a common interconnection
. -
framework. Alter d u e corlsultative process the Authority notiiied, The
Telecom~nunication(Broadcasting and Cable] Services Interconnection
(~dciressctble Syswnls) Regulations, 2017 on 3'[1 March 2017
(hereinafrer ~.et'errccl as the Interconnection R e g ~ ~ l a t i o n20171.
s, As per
noriiication, ihe li~trrconneclionRegulations, 2004 a n d Interconnection
Kegularions, 2012 were to be repealed. However, a s these new
regulations arc sub-judice in r8arious courts, presently 6 e Interconnect
Regulations, 2004 a n d Intercon~~ection
Regulation, 2012 remain in
jb1-CC.

1.3 One o l rhe prim? benelil ol the digitization is the abiliiy and the
control oi' the subscribers in cl~oosingthe channels. 111 the digital
addressable systcrns, the t e c h ~ ~ o provides
lo~ lor Electronic Program

Page 5 of 24
 Guide (CPGJ wherein the channels being carried on distributor's
i i'j'
nr~vvorkcan br ~ ~ ~ b : l l ; ~int e d;: sinlple easy Lo ~inclers~and
mtinner so
t h a ~a subscriber can easily go ih1.ougl1 [his guide and selecc :he
channel of his choice instead of flipping through all the channels. A
typical digital acldressable system provides set-top-box along with a
rcmotc to cliablc subscriber to seicct a cliannel. Electronic
Prograrnmir>g Guidc (EPG) provides list of channels availabic in the
distribution net\vo:.k enabling the subscribers to choose desired
television channel through a menu. The niel-.u categorizes the
[:!.
cl~annelsinto various categories,'genres. Tile clistributor arranges all
channels available in its network in a Logical Channel Number (LCN)
typically in tlie range f~.ornOCO to 909.The castomer convenience lies
in [he way thc charlrlcls arc groupccl togcthcr among various genrcs.

1.4 While the EPG provide convenience of selection to the customers, it

also provides a n opporr-unity lo Lhe distributors who may position the
channels at LCN numbers giving better visibility to ensure higher
uptake/ selection by customers. This feature enables distribu~orsto
bargain so~iicadditional bcnefits fro^ the broadcasters to place a
channcl a t a l.CN that attracts rnorc cyc-l~alls.To clarify, let u s take
an example of placing a channel at LCN '00 1 '. Being the first chainel
. -
number, i t aLtrocts l ~ i g l ~ econvenience,
r :is subscriber can select a
channel by simply pressing '001' or simply ' I ' through remote.

1.5 Sometimes, this facility of placing a channel by distributor resuits in

same discriminatory practices by placing a channel in a
ciisadvantageo~isposilion. Exaniple. Placing a News channel among
.-
the group of devotional channels. Consiclcring these issues, TRAI in
'relccommunica~ion (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection
[Digital Arldressablc Cablc Tclcvision Systems] Rcgulatiorls, 2012
[hercin after lnterconncction Regulation 2312), inter-alia, mandates
that every broadcnstrr shall declarc ihc genrc of its channels and that
rhc MSO sliall placc cliarincls in tlic respective gcnrc dcclarcd by tile
 broadcaster, I L also mandates that one channel shall appear in only
one genre

1 6 Such provisiorrs arc not part of the Tclecommunication (Broadcasting

and Cable Services) interconnection Regulation 2004 dated 10th
December, 2001 (herein after Interconnection Regulation 2004) which
was initially applicable lor non-acidressable cable T V systems and was
laler amended to include addressable syslems such a s LITH, HITS,
and IPTV.
,. .

1.7 Complaints \\!ere received lrom staiteholders in Lhe pas[ regal.ciing

placing ol tele\~isionchannels on multiple LCNs allegedly lor influe~lcing

~elevisionratings. Actions were Laken on such service providers as per
the extant prov~sionsof the regulations.

1.8 The lelevision ratings in India are published under thr 'Policy
Guidelines for Televisioi~ Kaling Agenc~es in India' issued by the
MinisL~-\.of lnfoi-malion and Broadcasting (MIB) on 16.01.2014,and the
said guidelines wcre formulated based on recornn1enda:ions of TPdI.
The Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC] is a registered
agcncy undcr thcsc guidclincs that provides l'clcvisiorl Ratings in thc
country. As pcr ti.^ said guiclclincs the agcncy shall also bc govcrned
I,-'
... . by t ~ ~ c ' ~ r o v i s i oofn sl'R.41 Act, 1997. The guidelines also speciiies t h a ~
tile data generaled by [he laling agency is made available, on paid
lbas~s:10 all inlel-ested slakeholders in a transparen1 and equitable
manner.

1 IVith [he gro\~1liin Lhr numbrr o l channels ancl incl-easing varieLy of

., -
programmes avc-~ilable.the [ask of borh broadcaslers and adverlisers
in L-~lloca~ing
1-esources becomes increasingly dil'licult. Market
segmentation and [argeting have become vital in such a scenario. C)n
the basis of audience measuremen[ data, ratings are assigned to
various prograrnnlcs on television. Tclcvision ratings in turn influence
coiltent and progrnrnrncs produced for the viewers. Better ratings
\vould promotc a programme while poor ratings will discouragc a
 programme or coilLent, I~lcorrect ratings tvill lead to producrio~l of
conteni which may not be really popular, while good content a n d
programmes may bbe left out. False a n d misleading ratings, therefore,
can affect not. only broadcasters ancl adverri:;ers but also the viewing
public a s \a:ell. Therefore, there is a need to have accurate
mcasurcrnent and reprcsentativc television ratings for the
pl-ograrnmcs. P1:ii:crricnt of tcle~ision channels on multiple LCNs
obliterates the above said objective of the TR? guidelines a n d
measurement.

1 . 1 0 The practice of running a channel on multiple LCNs allegedly for

influencing televisioll rating was brought to the notice of the
Authority. This w a s allegedly done by some broadcasters in collusion
with the clisiributors, who placed some television channels on rnultiple
LCNs. As the TV channel ratings measurement is done on the basis of
unique water mark ID of a channel, the d a t a of viewership of all s u c h
rnultiple LCNs is aggregated a n d reflccts in final ratings. It is obvious
that a channel ai;~ilablcon more LCNs will have higher probability of
vicwcrship. On receipt o i complaints, TRAI intervened a n d acted as
per the provision of the extent regulations.

,,/7:
,.
it.. 1 . 1 1 I-lo\vc;cr, this priicticc was latcl- shifted to landing pagc a n d the
Authority rcccivcd quitc a t'cxv complaints regarding the same. In
industry parlance, ~ I I C landing channel or thc iaiiding pagc rcl'ers to
the Logicd Channel Numher (LCN) which is displayed first when the
Set Top Box (S1'B) is switched on. It h a s been reported that the
pl.acLice of placing a regislered satellite TV channel having watermark
ID on (he landing page h a s Lhe po~eiitialto aifect the viewership d a t a
or t h a t channel. Therefore, it influences the television audience
measurements a n d television ratings. Landing page issue h a s also
drawn attention of tlic MIB a n d rhc Parliament as well. MIB issucd a
letter dated 24.08.2017 to BARC to stop giving rating to s u c h
channels which arc not aclhcring to thc Regulations of TRAI. In this
 connection, bllB also foi-\\larded complaint letters i t received from
various stakeho1del.s. This issur \vas also raised before the Lok Sabha
during ihe Monsoon Session. 2017. Afler due consideration and
deliberation with stakeholders, the Authority issued a direction' dated
811' November, 2017 wh::~.ein it was directed that. a!l the broadcasters
and clistributors of television channels, to rcstrain from placing any
registered satellite tclevision channel, whose TV rating is released by
TV rating agency, on thc landing LCN or l a ~ ~ d i nchannel
g or boot up
screen. 'The said clirection was chaile~igedby some MSOs and a news
bl~oadcaslerin Lhe Hon'ble Telecom Dispules Se~llementand Appellale
Tribunal (TDSAT). As per intcril~lorders, the direction is made non
operational. The petitioners contended the said direction, inter-alia,
primarily on t l ~ cgro~111ds
of transparency. During l~caringin Hon'ble
TDSAT, on 911' biarch, 201 8, the Authority conveyed its intention to re-
consider the issue in lotality. Hon'ble TDSA'1' granted permission for
the same.
1.1'2 The objective of this consultation paper is to initiate comprehensive

c o ~ i s u l ~ a ~ i oonn s all issues reiriling Lo landing page with an aim lo

protec~thr i n ~ e r e s lof the co~lsunlersand fail. gi-ou~thof [he sector.
The Issues rc!ated to placiiig of a Channel on Landing Page is
. .
discussecl in details in Chapter 2 and the compilation of the issues
raised for consultation is given in Chapter 3.
1.13 'Thc coiis~~ltnlion
may r e s u l ~in n~otiificalion of Regulations, issue of
tlirrclion or any o ~ h e rac~iona s felt necessary by the Autliori[y.

l u 7rroadc:isirrr and T)hsr>l l r ~ i ~ of

I I111.rr-luln Chilrlr~rlsrelinlng I I displily o i lclri?s~u~i
u r Telrilts~cir~ chilrl:~rls on
I;ul(l~n:: LCN ,\c<:csslblc ar hrrp !/rl;u.xoa ~n/s~rcs,rlclhuit~lilcslL~uccr~on.UnCS.Ot(I lLOI'7p6i

Page 9 o i 24
 CHAPTER 2

Issues related to Placing of a Channel on Landing Page

2. 1 Placemenr of channels is o r ~ zof the activities ol a distributor.

'The disu-ibulor p!-ograms LCNs ac its head-end :o m a n g e all ihe
a\,ailablc channels in a sequential order. Fnr this purpose distributor
,~~.. takes into account various fac~ul-sinclcding c ~ s t o m e r ' sdemand,

operational convcniencc, discouli~ing scheme agreed with thc

broadcasters, languagc ctc. This itaturc is normally provided through
the middleware ci tlie network. As part of placement, distributor
srlects one cliannel number generally a s derault channel 01. home
channel \vhicn can be displayed iirst by a n y STB connected to the
nerwork, whenever i l is swiiched on. In industry parlance, the landing
ciiannel or he landing page refers to such defauil LCN or the home
channel, .As per ihc practice, this channel is available for display on
all tile STRs colinccrcd t.o tlic net\votk of a distributor whenever tlie
Sei Top Box is s\vilcneci on. Such channel niay wen be available to
st~hscribcrs\vho have not opted lor the channel irrcspcctive of the [act
. -channel is pay c l ~ a ~ i n (11-
ii thr e l Cree to air channel. This iealurr may
,-
..
.:1.

be risefrll lor pop~~larizing

new channels/ contenlj programme or- their
ow11 platform servic:es, for proviciing customer related information etc.
~rc~adcastel.
mav utilize tlie landing page reature ol a distributor to
reach more subscribers to get more advertisements or popu:arize its
prograrnn~cs/contcn!/channcl;somc ol t!~cscb e ~ ~ e l imay
t s pass oil to
thc distributor. Thcl.cfore, landing page Inay be part of the businrss
mociel anti revenue source for distributors and broadcasters.

2.2 Placing of' a cha~inel 011 lar.di11g page allouls distributor to

display a particular :clcvisic~nchanrlcl ibr a predcfilicd dul-ation bcfore
the subscriber sbvitclics to ariut11c1-chanilcl. The preclefincd dul-a t ~
' on
is generally conl~gurableand prese~itlylow in many cases. During this

Page 10 of 24
 period remote do not allow, subscriber to flip channels. Further, since
a Landing Page LCN is only one Tor a distribu~or[herefore lhere is no
possibilily ol placing any olher- channel on same LCN simultaneously.
However, distributors can change the program / channel in the
landing page from time to time. Presently there is regulatory
Iramcworlc to g i i d c plaocmcnt of' TV c h a n ~ i c lin d i s t r i b ~ ~ t c network
rs
but thcrc is no r c p l a t i o ~ istipulating critcria to place a climncl on
landing page. Therefore, landing page LCN lnay be used for placing a
lelevision channel lo show enhanced reach compared to olher
channelsplaced in olher LCNs, [herefore, ihe compeling broaclcas!rr
m a y see it a s n discriminatory practice.

2.3 Non-discrirni:~alion is the fundamental principle of the

i n r e r c o n ~ i e c ~ irie~g~ui i a ~ i o ~ i sKeslric~ion
. on piacenienl or channels Lo
ensure non-discrimination is already II>ULor existing interconneclion
regula:iolis. Ta avclid any even~ualityoi a cl~annelbeing placed in a
disadvantageous position a s compared to anothel- channel of the same
genre, a provision was made where under a broadcaster h a s to
indicate thc gcnrc of a channel and the rnulti system operator has to
include that channel in the respective genre. The provisions of
Interconnection Ke,wiations 2012 are given below:-
. -
"5(14A) Euerg broa.clcasler. shall declare the gerrre of irs channels
uilc% such g e r m shiill be elthel- News artd Current AjJuirs or
bfotairlrrier~t or Sports or Kids or hfz~sicor LQkstyle or Movies or
Religious or. Devotiorlrtl or. C;enei.ul Bntertuir!nler~t (Hindi) or
i;enerul Enlei-tuu~ntent (Engiish) or Generul Erttertuinrnent
-.
.
(regionu! lunguucle).
5(14B) '?'he rniilli system operator shail plctce the chanrlels of a

5jJSA) E u c ~ y~ r ~ ~system
t l t ~ operator shall displuy, In his Electror~lc
Proqrnnlrrie Guide, all the charlnels o,ffired by him, in the s a m e

Page 11 of 24
 chanr~eih a s been indicated 6y the
genre in which a p~lrtic~llar
broc[dcc[sterurtd one channel shall appeclr in only one genre."

2.4 Mowcvcr, such p;ovisions arc not part of the Tclccommunication

(Broacicnsting ;inti Cable Scrvices) Interconnection Kegulation 2004
dated 10th December, 2004 (herein afks Interconnection Regulation
2004) which was initially applicable for non-addressable cable TV
systrms and la1r.r amended lo include addressable systems such a s
DTH, HITS,IPTV.

2.5 The abovc s:iiti two interconnection Regulations were replaced

by (he Telecommunication [BI-oadcasting and Cable] Services
Inlerconneciion (Addressablr. Systems) Regulations, 2017 dated 3'd

Marc11 2017 (herein after the Interconnection Regulations, 2017)

repealing the previous interconnection reguiations. The provisions
related to placing of char~nelswel-e strengthened in these regulations.
It has the rollo~vingprovisions:.

" 1 8 . Listing o11' chctnnels in electronic progrurnrne guide.- (1) Every

bi.oudcrrsrer shull declare the geizi-e of its churlrtels and suc!z genre
shnll he (!ither 'D'i~oliorrai' or 'Gei1ei.d Entertainment' or %folainrnerrl'
or 'Kids' or 'Muuies' oi- 'Ahcsic' or 'News und Current flfuirs' or 'Sports'
-or 'Miscelini~eo~is'.

(2)Ii shall hc ni.on.datory lor the distributor to place chnni~elsin the

elec~ronicprogrummc:yuitie, in srich u wuy !hut the [eleuision chaiulels
o j same genrr, os declared by tile hluadcc~siers,are pinced together
consec~itiuelyartti one chunnel siruli uppeur u: one place only:

Provided :hut ull ti?leuisionchunnels of'surnc lu<yuuye within the

sume yetire shc~iluppear together cor~secutiiielyin the electl-or~ic
p~~ograin.riic
gutde:

1'1-ouitlrtijuriher thut it shuil bc permisstblc to the dis:ributor lo

picice u c~~corrtel
uirder sub-yenre within the genre declared for
b y the hroadcco.ster.
the cho~iric?/

Page 12 of 24
 (3) Every tiistrib~itor o j television ci~arinels si-lull assign u unique
chan.n.el riun;hcr fbr each iclevisio~ichunnel available or1 the distribulion
network.

2.6 Furlhrr, ihe provisions ol The Telecomml~nication(Broadcasling

a n d cable) Services Standards of Quality ol Service and Consumer
Protection [Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2017 are a s under:-

"35. Display oJ clirtnr~elsin, E P G - ( I j E u e y distributor of Ieleuision

charirleis s11all dispiiiy n;l chonr~elsavaiiuble on its piutforri? ir? the
electronic progrctrrirne yrtidc and eacli ch:lnnel shull h e listed under the
r ~ s l x c t i u egenr? of the chaiinel a s declared b y the broudcasier urtder
upplic:iib!e innjyr~ideror I-?guiutions no!flc+d b!; the Authorityfron~time
to tirnc ond one c\ranriel shnil opprur at one picice only:

Pro~jided thnt it shall be permissible ,[or the distriburor to divide the

cliarrnt?l.s tinder orit? genr-2 into s:ih-ger~ieson the Oasis o/iurlg~iageor
r-rg~oriurid such ciiclririe!~sticil~ be nssigrred ~lnicjuelogica! chanr:el
riurrtho-s within the sub-genrcx

Providcd j':iriher [hut the channels of saiiie languuge shall be pul

together within the snrne subgeni-e."
I-', . .
The above said provision of interconnection regulations a n d Qua!ity of
Service Regula~ions deal :rilt~ placemcnt of chaznels lo avoid
discrimination b a t [here is 1:o direci provision regarding placement or
channels on landing page

Complaints relating to placement of channels -..

2.7 TRAI h a s I-cceiiwi large number of complaints c n 'Placement of

cllauncls or) rr~ultiplcIXNs siruultanci~cslyand including placing a
channcl on landing pagc. It was al;cgeci that somc broadcasters are in
collusion wit11 clistril~utorsare placing tlie channels on rnultiple LCNs
and landing pagr io inllurnce television rarings. Initially, the
complainis were rrgarcling running of c h ~ u ~ n eonl multiple LCNs in
 different genres simultaneously. Thereafter when TRAI intervened', the
practice or placing of channels on multiple LCNs on diiferenl genre
was shirled io placing the channel o n multiple LCNs within same
genre, simultaneously. Thereafter, this practice was shifted to specific
type of dual LCNs wherein a TV Channe! was placed on landing page
1,CN as-wcll-as iviti-iin its rcspcctivc gcnrc. Also, somc distributors
adapted thc practicc of placing a channel on landing channel only but
not in its own grnre. Similarly, sometimes, the channels were placed
on single LCN within iis genre, however, [his channel was maclc a s
'Landing Page'. In addilion Lo ihis some or the receni complaints were
relating to placing of a. channel of a particular genre in a language
other than the language of the channel. For example English News
Channel is placccl along ivith Tclugu Ncws or Bcngali ncws Channels
i n rhc rcgioil \vlicre such lnnguagc is popular. I11 all these complai.nts,
the cillrgatiuns \yere against the broadcasters and distributors
regarding inlluencing oS ~elevisionraring of a TRP rated channel. Mosl
of the issues raiscd in the above mentioned complaints get addressed
with Lhe provisions oi Interconneclion Regularions, 2017, excepL Lhe
issues relaling LO placemenl ol TV channel on landing page. Hon~ever,
these regulations are sub-judice before various courts. Therefore, the
. - provisions in Interconnection ReLgulations2012 are in force.
extant

Television ratings

2.8 The te!cvision ratings in India are published under the "Policy
Guidelines for 'Tcicvision Rating Agencies in India" issued by the
Ministry of Inhrmalion ~ u ~Broadcasiing
d (MIB)on 10"'
January,
-
2014, and Lhe said guidelines \vex formulaLeci on the basis or
recommendariorls3 oi' TRAI dared 11!'1 September, 2013. The
r.. l
H,. s A\.ldicnc:l! 12csi:nr-i:li Council (BARC) is a registered agency
undcr thcse guitlclincs that 1:rovidcs Tclcvision Ratings (also known
as Tclcvision Rating Point (TRP)) for programs and channels in the

Page 14 of 24
 country. The underlying spirit of policy guidelines for te!evision rating
in India is LU have LiccuraLe, credibie, i r a n s p a r e ~ ancl
i ~ represei~~ative
TV audience measuremen:. At present, the Broadcast Audience
Research Co~lncil[hereinafter 'BARC') is the only registered agency
under t l ~ e s cgaidelincrs that provirles Television Ratings in the countr)~,
BARC relenscs ratings in rcspccr of morc than 550 satcliite TV
channcls out. 01 861 TV' channcls registcrcd for dou.11 linking in India.
A s per the said guidelines the agency is also governed by the
provisions or TWI .4cL. .As per the clause 7 or ihe said guidelines, the
raLes for rating data/reporLs shall be non-discrimina~ory a n d
trai1sparc:it and the rate card for rating clata/rel~orts shall be
in the public domain 1.1).
p~~blishec! tile sating agency. Further, the
dara gcneratcd by thc ratlng agcncy bc madc avallablc, on p a d b a s ~ s .
to all mtcl-cstrd staltcholdcrs In a transparent a n d cquitablc manncr.

Audience measurement Methodology

2.9 Under this methodology, a unique watermarked code is

embedded in the ~ i ~ ~ component
dio or the channel. This code consists
of the Channel ID Kr, the lime slamp. BAR-0-Meters installed a t panel
housel~old'sp~.ernisesc:iplures the watermark of the TV channel when
s u c h - channel is bcing viewed by the panel household.
The audiencc mcnsurcment is carried out thl-ough panel homes which
a r e drawn from thc pool of households selected through a n
establishment survey. 'I'he selection of panel homes, from the
household pool created through establishmenr survey, are based on
clisLribuLion o l target viewership for a particular segment like age
--.
group, socio-economic class, gender, wol-king status, multiple delivery
platforms, all Stntcs a n d urban & rural markets. A s per the BARC's
methodoiopi of audience measurement, the ratings are measured in
thc folloc\:ing manricr :-

':As curl :I..: r ) r ~ ~ : r ~ o2017

l~r~.
' Ll:\l<L' ~ l ~ t l ~ o d: obr~~.:.>!:b!:t!
l o ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ! ! ~ ~ ~ ~ i : ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ . L ~ c ~ ~ : ~ ! ! 1a51lx
1~~1~1~~1!-~1~111~r!o~0~~~

Page 15 of 24
 Dutcl collccfed jrurn file rneters is 11.1 seconds. I-foweuer, iri kehPing with
inlernational stan.dards, ull ualidafions rules are on, viewing sessions
(b!ocks uj'tirne uj'TV Set on in the HH - Tuning; and of euch indiuidua!
u!t:iuiiig 'i'V - I/ietuir~cg)iind reported dato is in clocli rni~uctes.Hence, all
duta rieetls lo h(! conui.rted to clock inin~itcs/i.e. Hii:hI1"r'Ij'orm~1t,
e.y.
12:0i1:00 lo 12:O l:OU, 1 2 0 1:OO to 12:02:00 and so on).

Iitdiuid~rnl Vielving S e s s i o ~ ~wirhir!

s a cioclc niinule: For BAR-0-Meter
nleasured TI/ sets there are rules applied to the euents that alfribute
uie~virlqto one and orlly one TV cho~znelfor a n entire clock minute.
On!!/ o71.c chunncl is eligible ! ( I ~.eceiucuiciwing credit {or each clock
rrri~r~itc!lhroliyt~u~it
the: iiiewirig d u y , l f [lrr ir~cliuid~iul
is vie~uir~g
CI TV

channei for .30 seconds 01- more in a clock minute, the m ! e s ore
straightfoiwur~iund uieiuirlg is uttributed to that chnr~nelfor the entire
c!ock min~ite

The riiies become Inore contplex w h e n uieu~ingduring a clock miniite

inuolues rrtuitiple c:har~neis/ur( I tutu1 o f 3 0 or inore seconds, Additional
i.ulcs nrc r-t?qriircdu s tieso-ihed l ~ e l o ~ u fprocessily
or ewer11datu.

Chan~lel!/ieiuinrj Sessions within u clock rninute: Irldiriiduuls can.uie~u

niu!ti~~ic
ciiiirrriels ~ilithii~CJ single clock minute, ifowewer, urtly one
chnnnel ioill he iissi:jnec/ tilt. uiewincg in ench c!ock n ~ i n t ~ t ib
e . cissign
. -this uiewiny, ii~efiiiowingrules c1r.c ccpplied.
R ~ i l eI - O~il!]one cirur~riel~uuiched:The viewing for the entire clock
rriirrzite <jetsrittr-ibuted to thcr 1 c:harinel

Rule 2 - Alr.iIli[~iecharirtels wcltchrd luith dqferent uiewing durufions:

l'ic~uing is alll-ihuted Lo the channc! wiih [he rnaxirn~irn viewing
~1~~1.ut1u1.r. -

Rule 3 - !vluiriplt?chnnneis ic~nicheclwith !iuo or more ci?annels hawing

the snnle niaxim~iniuie~uingdurnliol~:There are two scenarios Jbr this
rule-

Scer~ulio30 - One oJ the c h u ~ ~ n ewith

l s the rna.uimutn uiewing duration
,noiles into tile ncsl c!trclc tninlrle, In this cuse, vie~uingis atlrihufed to
the chunrtei rrrouirly into tire 11eittclocli rnin~ite.
Page 16 of 24
 Scef~ario3b Norie uf'rhe chur~riclswith tkie rr~oxirrirlmvie~vingdurution
e s lilt? nexl clock minute, 111 lhia case, uieiuir~gis ott>ibutedfo u
n i o ~ ~ iftto
~ u f l d o r nch~iiirlc.1,from urnorlg !hose cl~unncis hilvirlg the niu~irnuni
vietuir~gdurctitor~.U S I I I a~ i.n~idt~lr>
uilotnlerrt a!yoriihn~.

it is perli~icnl to notc lh.01 fhc 30 .secoi~iis or fnr;re rule, u~herever

applied, riJ'i.1.s to u 10tul oJ' 30 seconds in. o clock ininute - w k f h e r
cor~seailiveor riot

The pi-e-pi'ocessetl rninute level dutc~ is then subjected to .further

proct?ssiri~~
with srljiwore thni perjbrn~sdnla ualidalion und weighing.

2.10 Therefol-e, a s per the audierxe measurement o f BARC, viewing

of a TV channrl is calculated on the clock ininute basis. Further, a
channcl ~vitha rriiixilnurt~viewing cluratian in a clock minute gcts rhc
cntirc viewing attribute for :hat minute. If a channcl is placed at a
lai~dingpage, ~vl?cncvcrcustorner switches ON the STB, i t displays the
landing page containing he chaiinel first lor a predefined duration.
'J'he predelined clurc~tion is grnerally configurable a n d during this
period remote do no( alloa- subscriber LU flip channels. This Lime-
p e r ~ o dattains criticality and may influence television rating. It may
happen multiple ~ i m c sa s and Lvhen custorner su;itctes ON the STB in
a day.
. -
After the STB is su:itcheci ON, landing cnannel continues to r u n
on background, custorner brourses the mcrlu options which consumes
s o n e time. I( is also argued ha; in rural a n d remote places x h c r e

rlei:tric supply 1s erratic, TV may get s\vilched on when no one is there

d . may project
und landing page continues as ii it is being ~ i ~ t c h eThis
false 1-esuits for channci rating, 6s such TV rating marking is not on
the basis of choice o i consurnel.. I!' a landing c h a l q ~ e lis a water
marked channel, Lhe channel is measured a s viewed, even though i h r
customer may not b c watching that channcl at all or may bc working
on other m c l r ~options at thc start. Further there is a very high
probability that the custorner is not vie~vingsuch c h a n ~ ~ ae sl her/his
natural preferrnce. Such ;idditional and non-genuine viewership may
give rhe channel a n upper hand in the rating recorded by llne audienct.

Page 17 o f 24
 measurement. Therefore, placing the channels on ianding page may
be a powerlul tool in influencing and artilicially inflating the ratings of
:I TV c h a r ~ n e l ,This practice mav lead to scdden hike in television
rating in a velj; short span of time and distort age11 established Eco-
system.

2.1 1 The coLlliler view could he thal the television channel at landing
page ma!; not be viewed by the customer, il it is n u t to his tasle,
therefol-c- may nlovc to desired c l ~ a n n e l ol her/his own choice.
Thcrclorc thc laridir-~gpogc may not irnpact significantly. Landing page
may be uscci as a promotional iool for ncw channcls so that a
customer can experience the quality of nevi lacnched
programme/con~ellL or cl-imnel so that customer can take ar:
informed clecision of subscril~irigsuch channel. Another view could be
the TV channel a1 landing page may be seen a s one additiollal channel
or plogram ai~ailable 1.0 customer, beyond his choice oi c h a n ~ ~ e l s .
Customer may watch if he/ s h c likes, else it may be ignored. Counter
view could be that ( h e uunranted channel at landing channel may
brir~gannoyarlcc to customel. a s it nlay rlot bc as per his tastc, cvcl-y
time STB is s~vircl~cd
ON i t srarts w~ithsuch channel.

2.12 - .Issues for consultation:

Q1. Do you feel that emerging concept of placing TV channel on

landing page can influence TRP ratings? Suggest the action
which may address the issue with justification.

42. Should concept of landing page be defined? If so, please

-
suggest the definition of the landing page with justification.

43. Will defining Framework for placing TV channels on landing

page affect t h e present business model of distributors? If so,
will it be considered impacting the freedom to do business by
distributors of TV channels? Give your suggestions with
justification.

P a g e 18 of 24
 0
132
44. Is landing page a natural choice of consumer while viewing
TV channels? If not, why should channels, whose TV ratings
are released by TV rating agency, be placed on landing page?
Give your comments with justifications.

2.13 In ol.ilcr- lo take advantage ol clilizing landing page and

...
simultanco~~slyrcducc inilucncc of ir on TV ratings rhc lollolving
oplions may be considered:

a. There should not be any restriction by MSO in the landing

page settings barring the channel from flipping for a
specified duration: This may reduce influence of landing
channel on relevision ratings but may not co~npletelymitigate.
However, !his is not easily cniorceable as conliguration changes
are easily possible at ;he distributor end. Such regulation
requirr a very high drgree c l ove;.sight.

b. Modifying the configuration in rniddleware such t h a t last

visited channel of t h e subscriber may be kept as a landing
channel: This option may mitigate the influence ol landing page
. -
oli trl-vision ralings but pre\fents dist~.ibulor !o mone~izerhe
Seatures of landing page. Further, in order to implement this
OPLIOI?, [ht: STBS shoultl contain minimum internal memory.
T11c succcss of this rncrhod will tlcpcntl on thc capability ol
STB! tiistributors' rniddleware to render last viewed channel.
This may noL be Ceasible in old versions ol STBs and/or
-- .
rniddlc\vare

c. Barring placement of such channel on landing page, which

are watermarked and for which viewership is measured by
the television rating agency: This option would enable the
clistril~utorsin using !anding page as a promotion tooi lor non-
ra!e:l channels. Further. a landi~lgpage can 'br utilized for
 stou.ing I - I S clippings of channels/programmes,
~railrl-s,progr~xmming services which are no1 waiermarked,
c o n s ~ ~ ~ nlricndly
cl. information suck as Loll iree no., customer's
account drrails, s~:bscriprionpaclcagcs dcrails etc., valuc added
servicrs. Tlius the marketing potenilal ol the landing page call
still bc cffcctivcl!; cxploitcd by the distributor rhrough scvcral
mcans. This option may oblitcratc tiic ill eficcts to influcncc TV
ralings by u s e 01' landing page.

d. Placing of only consumer related information on landing

page: Piacing oi consumcr rclated int'o;.tnariou o n 1andi:lg pagc
would improve consumer educaticn about offers and services.
However, this will retiucc the options for the disaibutors a s [hey
\i.ould he p~.evc.n~edfrom nial<i~:g some additional revenue
lhrough lancl~ngpage.

2.14 Issues for consultation:

45. Whether placing of a TV channel on landing page increases

television ratings? If yes, why TV Channels, whose TV ratings
a r e released by TV rating agency, should not be barred from
being placed on landing page? If no, why broadcasters are
eager to place their channels on landing page? Give your
suggestions with justification.

Q6. What should be the criteria/consideration to p u t a TV

channels on landing page? Give your sqgestion with
justification.

47. Do you think the influence, if any, i n television ratings by

placing of TV channels on landing page can be mitigated
through changes in measurement methodology of television
ratings? Give your suggestions with justifications?

Page 20 of 24
Q8. Please comment on the feasibility to implement user's 'last
visited page' a s landing page in distributors' network?

Q9. Should the landing page be used to place TV channels not

having TRP rating or only to provide platform specific
information? Give suggestions with justification.

Q10. Any other suggestions/comments related t o the issue

under consideration?

Page 21 of 24
 CHAPTER 3

Issues for Consultation

Q1. Do you feel t h a t emerging concept of placing TV

channel on landing page can influence TRP ratings? Suggest
t h e action which may address t h e issue with justification.

Q2. Should concept of landing page be defined? If so,

please suggest the definition of the landing page with
justification.

43. Will defining Framework for placing TV channels on

landing page affect the present business model of
distributors? If so, will i t be considered impacting t h e
freedom t o do business by distributors of TV channels? Give
your suggestions with justification.

44. Is landing page a natural choice of consumer while

viewing TV channels? If not, why should channels, whose
TV ratings are released by TV rating agency, be placed o n
landing page? Give your c o m m e n t s with justifications.
. .
Qs. Whether placing of a TV channel on landing page
increases television ratings? If yes, why TV Channels,
whose TV ratings are released by TV rating agency, should
not be barred from being placed on landing page? If no, why
broadcasters are eager t o place their channels on landing
page? Give your suggestions with j u s t i f i c a t i ~ .

46. What should be the criteria/consideration to p u t a TV

channels on landing page? Give your suggestion with
justification.

47. Do you t h i n k t h e influence, if any, i n television

ratings by placing of TV channels on landing page c a n be

Page 22 of 24
 mitigated through changes in measurement methodology of
television ratings? Give your suggestions with
justifications?

Qg. Please comment on the feasibility to implement user's

'last visited page' as landing page in distributors' network?

Q9. Should the landing page be used to place TV channels

not having TRP rating or oniy to provide platform specific
information? Give suggestions with justification.

Q10. Any other suggestions/comments related to the issue

under consideration?

Page 23 of 24
 List of acronyms

/
1I Abbreviations Description
I
I
Broadcasr ,4udience Research Council
! Digital Addressable Cable Sysrenl

... .-

..

Page 24 of 24
 .+,-p7p,
,+;$. 44
.>,<
,.$$*Fqj
-,>,,a i
!r&$?r
TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
ilp, 9
' ,, !,\,!
7 YK3 /Government of India
.<
!~
'
,.)$.: 1 ?:4 \
-!,,.,:... '!,., :!
f ;&,&;>,:;>'
:x.:.c L; ;&

Dated: 25Ib April, 2018

Subject: Directiou lo Broadcasters elid distributors of television cl~artnelsu n d e r section 13,

read wit11 sub-cial~se(ji) of clause (b) of s u b section (1) of section 11, of the
Telecom Rcgtllatory Authority of India Act, 1997, relnting to dispiay of televisio~l
clinrl~telson ln~tding1,CN.

No. 12-3712017-B8rCS.--- Whereas the Telecorn Regulatory Authority of India [I~ereinalrer

refttl.ed ro as 'the !\urhoniy'], establi~lled undsr sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Telecom
Regitlatory Authority of l n d i ~Act, 1997 (24 of 1997) [liereiniilrer r e l e t ~ e dto as TRAI Act,
19971, has been cntrustcd ro discharge certain functions, which bttcr-nlio, include ro regulate tllc
leleco!luiiunication services; fix the terms and condirions o l inter-con~lcctivitybetwccii the
scrvicc providcrs; ensurd ~cchnicalcompati!~iiityand effecrive inter-connection between different
service providers; lay-down the standards o f quality of service to be providcd by thc sctvice
providers and e n s u e the quality of scrvice and conduct thc periodical sutrey OF such s e p i c e
provided by the sc~viceproi,lders so 3s ro protecr inrerest of the consumers ofteiccolnmunicsrion
,P
sorvicas:

7
-. And wherens the C'entrnl Ciuvernmcnr, in the Ministry of Communicalion and
Information Tcclyology (Dcparlmcnt ~ETeIecotnn~unications). vide its no:ification No.39,---
(3) issue(/ 111 C X C ~ C I S I : CIIpowers cotife~.~.ed
up011 tlre Ceti~ralGovert~menrpruvisc) to
clausc (k! of sub-scction ( 1 ) of sectio~i2 oithe Ti<AI Act, 1997 and
(b) published i!ritier notilicariori nu~nbcrS.0.4?(E) datctl the 9" January, 2004 in ~ l t z
Gazette of India. Extraordinary. Parr 11, Sccrion 3 - sub-section (ji)---
has !:orificd broadcasting s e l ~ i c c and s cablc sc~viceslo bc rclecommunicarion service;.

3. And ivhereas rite Aurhosity, in exercise of its power under section 13, read with sub-
clause (il) of c l ~ u s z(hi of sub section ( I ) of section I I , of the Telecom ~ e g u r a t o Authority
r~ of
lndia Act, 1997, isswd a dirccrion dated the 8Ih Novcmbel; 2017 wherein all the broadcssrcrs
and distributors of television ciinnneis werc directed lo restraiit Rom placil~yany registered
satellire relc\ision channel, wllose T V raring is released by T V rating agency, on the !anding
LCN or landing chatme! or boot up screen ir~ilhinfifieen days f r ~ t nthe date o f issuance o f the
dircctioti;

Page 1 of 2

-.--
T m ?wi
m m,m nn + &, Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan. Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg
('pfIk i ?k. f&8 1 (Old Minlo Road), New Delhi-110002
h i Fax : t91-11.23213294,- ~ O I E P B X Nt91.11.23664145
O.:
4. And whereas the dirrction dated the 8" November, 2017 was chullcngcd by some service
providers bcforc Hon'ble Telecoln Disputes Settlement S: Appellate T~ibunsl(i~ercit~(i/rer
refi~.rcd to u.r Hon'blc Tribunal) vide Broadcasting Appeal Nos.!,2,3,4 and 5 of 2017 and the
Hon'ble Tribun,il virli. irs ortisr datcti thc 2?"%0venlber, 1017 dlrecteii that "the inipugncil
directiori shall nor be given eflecr lo" ;

5. sub~llittcd10 t!ic 1io11'hleTribunal 011 the gth Mal.ch. 2018 that

,411dwllcreas ~ I I C .Ai~~ho~.iry
ir will reconsider [lie impi~g~leli direction and retluested Tor posLponemell[ of the passing o l any
order on thc prcliniinsry issue, Hon'hie Tribuii31 kindly accepted thc submission 111adc by the
Autllol-ity:

6. And whel-ens wit11 the aim (o protect the i~~iercst

oT tlic consumers, to cnsurc lair growth
of rllc sccrol., and to cnsurc unbiased TR? rutings, thc .Authority has issucd a consultation paper
on .'l,sues rclalrd lo i31i~cingof l'elcvision Cllon11el on Luntiiilg Pagc" on tllc 3'd Apri!, 2018
seeking coltunelirs Isug~estiorlsof all the s!akeholders;

7 And ivhcreas rhc Authority, in vicw of its sublnissions maclc bclorc thc FIon'blc Tribunal
on tiic 9"' Marctl, 2018 anil ill o r i ! ~to~ exalninc ill detail IIIC varioils ~ S S L I C Srsised in the
cunsultation papcr, rclerrcd to in rhc prcccding para, inadc a statcmco! on ~Ilc18Ih Apnl, 2018
before the I-lon'ble .i'rihunnl that it has issued ;i fi.es11 consultation paper on the issues and has
decided to withdraw h e impu:ned direction dated the 8IhNovember, 2017;

8. And whereas tile Hon'ble '!'rihi~nal, \'ide its order daled tile 18"' April, 7-018 perinilied ihc
A~ttllorityto withilraw thc said dirccrion dated the Y"'November. 2017;

9. Now, thcrclorc, the Aull~ority,in exercise of its power under srction 13, rsad wit11 sub-
clarise (ii) ofclause (b) iilsub section ( I ) o r section 11, of the Telecoln Regulatory Authority o l
Intlia Act, 1997 ( 2 1 of 1997), hereby repeals the direction No. 12-37!!017-B&CS dated the 8Ih
'\'oucmber, 3015 \pit11 iri~~~lrdiate
ei'fect.
'h
(S.IZ.1.K. Cllai~dra)
Joint Advisor (BLCCSJ
-

Page 2 of 2
 Y-RTh-fm*
TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
1Tm FCFFi /Government of lndia

DIRECTION

Dated:3 Dcccrnber, 2018

Subjcct: 1)ircctioll to brourlca,tcrs a n d distributors o f telcvision cllnl~rlclsu n t l c r section 13,

rend w i t h sub-clause (ii) o f clause (11) o f sub sectiorl (1) o f sectiotl 11, o f the
Teleconl Regulntory A u t h o r i t y o f l n d i n Act, 1997, relating to display o f telcvision
~ll31111c1~.

No. 11-3712017-B&CS.--- 1Vliere:rs (lie .Teecorn Regulatory Authority oi' lndia [hereinafter
rekrretl l o as 'tlie Authori:y3], esrablislied undsr sub-section ( I ) o f section 3 o f the Telecom
Kt.gulatory Arilhoriry oi' lndia Act, 1197 (24 of' 1917) [lierein:if'ler rilrerred to as T R A I Act.
19971, has been enrrl~stedto discharge c e ~ ~ a functions,
in which htiev-a!ia, include to regulate the
~clr'commui~ication ser\,iccs; fix [lie rerms and coriditions o f inter-connectivity between rhe
service providers; elisllre rcclinical compo~ibilir:~
and ef'fecrive i ~ i r e ~ ~ - c o i i n e cberiveen
t i o ~ ~ different
service pl.ovidcrs; lay-down llie standards o f q l ~ a l i t yo f service to be provided by the service
providers and ensure thc qualily of scrvice and conduct tlic periodical sur\'cy o f sucli servicc
provided by the service providcrs so as to protect interest o f [lie consun~erso f t e l e c c m m ~ ~ n i c a t i o n
services;

2 .And \\,hcrcas thc Cc~rtral G ~ \ ~ c r n m c n t i,n tile Ministry o f Co~n~i!unicationand

Inrormarion Technology (Depar-11nen1oi'Telscommunic:ltions). r i d e its notification No.39,---
(a) issued ill ekercise ai'powers co~it'erred upon rlic Central Governlnenr proviso to
clailse (k) o f sub-sectio~i( I ) o f sec:io~i2 o f the T I I A I Act, 1997 and
(b: pl~blishcd[iiider ~ioritic:rrio~in!~mberS.0.41(E) dared the 9'" Jonl1al.y. 2001 i n ilic
Gazerre o f Indi:i, Extracirdi~ilry,Par1 11; Section 3 - sr~b-sec~ion (ii)---
h 3 notified broadcasting services and cable services to bc rclecommunication service;
/

3. .qnd whcrzas t l ~ eAutltority, i ~eue~.cise

) o f irs power under section 13, read ibitli sub-
;I:illse (ii) ofclause (b) ul'sub sectio!l ( I ) orscction I I. o r t h e I K A I Act, 1997, issued a direction
dilled t!le S"'Noveil~bcl.,2017 \.bilerein all the broadcasters and tiistribdtors o f television clirinnels
\\,ere directed ro restrain t o n 1 placing a:]! registered satellite televisio'n channel, \\,hose TV
raring i s released b y T V rating agericy, oil tlie l a n d i ~ ~Logical
g Cli:~nnel Number (LCN) or
1:inding cha~irrelor boot u p scrce11;

4. n d wliereos, pursu:lnt !o a cliallengc to 111s said direction beforelhe l l u n ' b l c Teleco~il

Disputes Sctrle~ncnt & Appellate T~.il:i~tia(liereinafter referred :o as tlo!l'ble Tribunal), rhe
iuthol-iry, vide its rli!.cction dated 25"' A p r i l 201 8, repealed tile aforelne~ltionedtlirection \\.it11
inlmejiate ei'fecr. ~i'rerobtaining rlic permission o f thc l i o n ' b l c Tribunal;

'mm W . CiTW ?TI? *+

(g.rm WI'I h),
Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan. Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg
Wf,
{(Old Minto Road), New Delhi-110002
h iF a x . +91-11.23213294,i'%+?R3%lEPBX No.: +91.11-23664145
 5. A n d whcreas, meanwliile in pursuance o f t h e above-rcl'erred challenge and sub~nissio:ito
Hon'ble Tribunal, the Authority issued a colisultation paper on "Issues related to \'lacing o f
Television Chan~ielon Lalidill:. G p e " on the 3'd April, 2018 seeking comnients /suggestions o f
ail (lie stokrl~olders;

6. And whereas the Autliority received 25 conimenrs and 2 coutirer-comnients from the
sraltcholdcrs in respolise to tlie aforesaid co~isuilationpaper dated tlie jrdApril, 2018 and the
Authority also conducted all upell house discilssion (OHD) wirli the stakeliolders on the 28'''
May: 2018;

7. And whcreas 011 t l i r issue, \vlieil~ertile practice o r plecing o f T V channel on landing

L C f i iniluences tile Televisio~i rating point (TRP), it has e~lierged l i o m the slakeliolders'
rcspolisc as w e as the a~islysisof'the dam ohtained from distributors m d Broadcast Audience
Resesrcli Coulicil (BAKC) tllat placing oi' :I cltannel o ~ landing i page infli~etices'l'elevisioii
rati~igs.T!ie dctaicd analysis o f lie! issi~esand rationale i n arriving the conclusions are given at
a~i~iexi~re;

S. e TRP, placing o f any T V chatinel, for wliicli

And wliereas due to p fore said i ~ i i i u e ~ l con
i'V rati~igsare released b) regisrered intijig sgericy (hrrciiiojier referred ro ns 'ratcd I ' V
clini~nel'),on la~ltliligL C N provides distinct advatitage to such cha~iiieli n tlic measured viewilig
sessions. That sucli addiriolial vieiversliip is due to appearance oi' ;I cliaiinel as a result o f tlic
defauli placement done by the dis:ributor, thereby resulting i n non-levcl playing field among
broadcasters;

9 And \\liereas despitl: l a n d i ~ i gpage being an i~nportantmarkctiny tool ibr br-oadcas~ersa!id

distribulors for prornotio~io!'rieir prograli?s a ~ l dservices, duc to its ill effects on TRP, using
tliis 1)lacement jeopardizes the accul-ac): and i l ~ ecredibility o f TV rating systeni:

10. And whereas the very purpose o f t h e policy guidelines for lelevision ratings it1 India is to
lia\e a credible; rransparent n ~ i drepresen!niive television audiencc measurement systelri ~ v l i i c is l~
C7 .,
b : ~ don t h e r e c o ~ n ~ n e n d : ~ ~ i o nf srlic Autlioiiry. Placing ;i rated T I t chan~lc!on landi~ipL C N
iinpedes the credibiiiry oi'tlii. ratings released by tlie agency;

II. And wliereas. o n rhc issuc o f possibility o f changes ill mcasulrlnent metilodology o f
rslevisio~iratings ro ~tlitigate[lie iiifluencz oi'!anding LC?< on Television rati~igs,i t was informed
by the egency conccrried [hat rile same is not feasible due to technical limirations. They informed
11ia1thc audience rneasilreniznt cannot disti~iguishbetween a wa!er~narlted channel placed o n
landing L C N or anywhere clse on the distribution platform's LCN;
-
I?. .And \\liereas rile A i ~ t h o r i t ya!so analyscd feasibility o f implementing other alternatives
to mitigete r l ~ ee R c l s uf place~ne~it o f rared T V clian~ielon la~idiiigLCN: sucli as putting a
reslriction on [he l a n d i ~ i gL C N settings, modifying conhguration in the middleware to put
landing page as a last visited page and Illandating distributor to place only consulner related
information on landing L C N . Tlie A U I ~ O ~observed ~ I ~ ilia[ these alternatives are either not
i'easible due to reclinical limitatiotis in various types o f distiibutor's networks or impacr their
c o ~ n r n ~ r c iinterests;
al
 I And wlierees ir is quite clcar that tlie landing LCN is riot a i ~ a l u clioice
~ ~ l o f lhe viewer,
tilereby causing undue distonio~i.And, l l i r Autliorily is ol'llir considertd iliew Ilia1 the rating ol'
TV channels should b? i e e from any disrorrion. as such artiiicial intl~iericeon TV rsriiigs
ntgates its sanctity;

14. Sow, therefore. llir Autliori!), i n exercise oTrlir powers conferred i ~ p o r i t under seclion
13: [.cad witli sub-c!ause (ii) o f clause (b) o f si~b-secriori( I ) o f section I I , o f the Telecom
Regulatory Aulhority o r l ~ i d i aACI. 1997 (24 o f 1997). ill order ro protect tile interest o f sel.vice
providers rind coiisilmcrs and cnsurc ordcldy grorvlli o f !lie sector, d i r e c l all broadcasters a!itl
disrributors o f the television cliarinels to restrain t'rorn placing any registered satellite television
chal~nel, \vl~osr'ITraring is relcascd by 'TV rari~igogency, 011 [lie landing LCN or landi~ig
channcl or the boot-up screen ~ v i ~imnladiale
li eVect. in case o f p r e v i o ~ ~ s entered
ly agreements,
eR>rls lnay b r inade to irnplcrnenr these directions as soon as possible and i t sholi be
i~iiplementedill all cascs by 2 I" blarch 2019. Further tile information o f such pre-existing
ayrerrncnts ~ v i t hfull dettrils o f tile parties to tile agreement, the terrilory, agl.eement period and
otlier reievarit dztails riiay bc sub~iiittedto the surliority within seven days f r o ~ n
!lie dote o f issuance o f this direction ar e~nail:advbcs-?@trai,gov.in.
a

( S a p ~ i aSliarma)
Joint Ad\,isor (DSiCS)

To.

A l l Broadcaste1.s and Disrriburors o f relevisiori channels

 Analysis o f kc! issues

(LCN) rerers to the

c i Iondin! page or landing Logictil Clinniiel N~i~nbe:.
I ) Landing s i i a ~ ~ l or
dzbulr LCN which is displayed firs[ ~vt~er~ever tile Set Top Box (Sl'ilj is swirched on.
Clinnnel placed at Li~;itIinpL C N is available to all S'TBs coiinectrd ro lllc iletworlc o l rliz
cistribiiror.

-
,, ,....
2) Televisio!l rating points (TR?) indicotr rile popularity o f a progran or cliannel. TR?
provides iiifbrniatioii aboi~rthe televisio~i:vatcliiiig liabirs (i.,. "Time spent" by a viewer 011
. ,
3 par'iicular 'I'V cli;i~inel) ( i f vieivers i'rom Jifiereii~socio economic backgrouiids. TRP Iielps
rhe advenisers and corporste inedia plaiincr in sclccti~igthe right T V cliannel to reach [lie
target audience. TRP rnay also inlliieiice the drc;sion o f a consuiner to slibscribe a channel.

3) TRP iillluences coiirerir aiiil prog:2ninies ?~.otlucetl li!r [lie viewers; berrer TRP v,otild
proniote a program \vliile ?oar 'TRI' will 3issoul.age program or conleiit, Incorrect TRP rkill
I ~ a dl o production o l conrent ii,liich niny 1101 really be popular, wliile good cciitetit or
programs may bc Itit OUI. .i'lius: itiislcadi~igTRP can affect iior o r l y rhe broadcasrers and ilie
aai,c;rissrs bill zlso the vie5~'ir'g public as \ v ~ I l .Tlierefbre, there is a need for accurate
ni~3~ureiiie1lr and rcp~.escntari:.i' tcicvijioil raiiny for tlie progrnmrnes as well as :lie
cliannels.

Doe3 1'I:icenieit u l rotcd TV channel on 13ndi11gLCN iiiI'luence'rKP'!

4) Duririg thc co~isulratio~~ proczss, coin~nt.~iis

o f the ~ t a k e i l o l d ~uere
r j soiigli~oil, 'wliellirr ~ l i e
priicrice o f placing a 'TV cha~liielo ~ the
i lalidiig L C N can iiifluences :lie TRP'. I n response.
marly broadcas:ers h;is statcd t h a ~the practice sf placing z T V cliannel on landiiig LCN
,nnuences TRP.011tile coilt;ary, Muti-Sysrem Operator (MSOj subniilied that the said
p:.actice dws nor disrort TRP. Dur~tigtlie Ope11 Fiodse Discussions, all rlir stakehodeys
including MSOs 3cc:p:td and o v r r r l j 3cl;l?owledged that ri-is pracri-e influences TR:'.
Hcwever saws st;ikc!iolde:s iiiaiiliai~iedh a i [lie i n i l ~ i c i i ~ise inilli~nal.411 the stiikeliolders
ecllocd rhc bahic p~inciple(1131 the relevision rzting neej to be credible! accurate nild
transparen[.

j j Tlic ?iuiho:.if\i ubser\,ed tii3[ Oiie oi' tllr rnei~ifacrors iii TV alldierice rneas~irernentis 11le
"l,inr spznt" sy a vic\~r.r on a pal-rici~larT V ch.int:d. As pcr !lit audience nieasureincnr
me11iodolo;y oi' BARC (p~.eseiirl) it is ;I!?oiil). registered ayei!cy for issuing TRP in !lie
cou~irry).viewing o r s T V chan;iel is ;aIculared OII the clock ii~inureb a s i k A chaiinel with a
n:axiiru~iiviervi~ipduration ill 8 clock rninule gets the enti:e viewing atrribiited to it for tliat
minute. If a cllan~ielis placed at 3 I:+r;diiig p q e , whenever a viewer switches on the STB,ii
direcrly leiids the bieivel- [:I 11131si:nrinel iirsl. Only. alterwards the viewer decidcs the
chaniiel heislle \\ailis to \rrirch. This h z i n ~:I riliid co~isumingpl.ocess, \vlierei~lrile viewe:
iil.sr scri~l:sto tlle gtiide or inisin liirliu rt.;~ding tihe contenr o f descriptioii telecasted on !lie
clio~neland de:ides iis per. hisllier choice. This phenoirienon Ihapperls i n B A R C sampled
homes also, where in 111: BAR-0-Meter implanted i n t l ~ clhom: is r ~ n n i i i gand calculeting

Pzge 4 of 7
 [lie cloclc mini~teso t ' r l ~ esubscriber's s~xyon [he I;lndir~g page, viervcr browses the menu
opricns ir,iicii colislnies some lillie, in siicli 6 scenario, though tile vieiver may 1101 like to
see tile la~idingchannel yet the viewrrsli,~pofthat channel gets registered technically. In its
commellts, one sralteholder has quoted 3 study according to wliicli, the average tinre talcen
by 2 viewer i i 4 3 sscunds before heislie decides and shifts to Iiislher choicc, thcrcby
potentially ilicrensiilg rile T I I F oi'tlic clia.inel placed oti the la1:ding cha~incl.

6) l'hc Atrll,ority also sought [lie data related to 'allding LCN ac:ivilizs f r o : i ~[ l i t dist~.ibuto:.sof
lelei.isio~: chat:lrels ailGI BAKC. \i1lliIe providirlg :!ic data B.4KC niell[io~iedtliar tlie repol.ted
d:.ta beill: pane; level Lira. cha~~ges in c i r u i ~ i g-iliiirrnj ivoilld be itltluenced by severiil
hctors, and i t is 110: posribie ro idzlitifi sac11 sp:;ifc trigger. It also trlcririor~edthat the d m
is co~ifidc~itial.Aftcr due analysis ot'rlie data, corrslarion ol'BAKC darn will1 [hat ofthc clara
fro111 distributor and exa~~linarion oi'tlle said infbrmatio~~,i t has bee11observed [hat, placing a
cllnnnel on tile landing LCN \:ads :o incl.ease in rile TRP.

7 ) In vicii. 01 the ~L'USOIIS surred above, llh: Aothoriry i s o f 111s view tiizt pinzing o f any T V
clie~lnelwhose TV ratings fire released by registered ra;ing agency, on landing LCN
prcvides disinci idvantage l o lhe charlrlel in [lie viewing srssii~nsrrcordrd. Further tha:
sucli ndditional viewcrsiip is dirz to invtr1ltrliar.y ap~iearancei)f a channtl caused by a deklill:
s c t r i ~ ~d go ~ i cby tlte dislribuior.

e l slatidifig LCN
Elfects of p l ~ c i i l grated 'rV e l l c l r ~ ~ ~on

8) D i ~ r i ~:he
i g consultatio~:, onc oftlie siaiteholde;~ stated tiar :allding page ca? be a boon (or a
m t r y c l ~ i ~ n ~lot r protilorc
l ilself, ivl1ile ar !le s m e t1n1e detrimental for il1e industry
cspccizlly the11 biggel and ivcil-ss~ablisnrc! players us: lllis pIn\Sor~r to increi\se its
Television ratings. llluciiig a cliatiiiel cn landing LCN may be a powerfill tool i n influencing
:III~ anificiaily it1:latil;p rlic raring oSa TV clicn~iel.This practice may Isad to sudden hike :n
televisiotl r a ~ i n gill a very sliol? span oiri111a211ddistor[ a well-established system illereby
d;stol~ili: the level playill:! field aillong the service prov~ders.Sucli influence on TR? is
1110ra ,criticill. iilien tile tliifcr:~~ce in ra:11i5 1:otli: nmo11g :Oc conipeting clian11eis is
~iiinisculc.III sucli csscs, tlic addirio~alrariiig points gained due to tile placement o f t!ie
ciiannel on :he I a ~ i d i i ~page g car] altcr tlic lcading positio~i.This situation leads ts creation o f
illusory TRI' for s~rclirated TV channel placed on landing page.

Itn08ct oS regu1:tling t l ~ ep l : ~ c e m e ~ oi l f T\'clilnnels on Inliding LC8 on distributor's

bosit~cisr~iodcl
-
9'1 o f T V cllannels on
611~ i l i sissuc, some d:strihurors com~;icnrcjrhai rcgt~latingthe placetnzii!
laniiiirg page \vould Ihavc financial i~nplicationson their business and rherciore i[ sllould be
left to rhs ninrkri klrcrs. Some brondcasiers commented tllar al:y restric~ionon landing page
rr;ill t c violstive oi'tlieir rigl lit to do business i~nderArticle l9(I)(g) of Coi1stituiion oi'l~ldin.
H'llilr i'eii8 broadcasters conimcnrcd rliar i n \lie garb o f :reedom c f doing business.
3isuiiiitor.s should 11ot he allowed to cngnge in practices ivllich are discrimirarory and are
;igail~sr rli: ititcrests o f Lonsuliiers 2nd broadcasters. D n r stakeholder comme~;[ed :hat
 I:indi~ig page should coiiri~il~eto bc a platibr~ii i t ilie i~ltcrit it carries i.e
pro1nstioniadvertisc11ic1ito f clian~ielor coiitelit, but not for ccmpetinp iii the race to carn
TRPs. The Authority re:ognizes that. the lalitling page is an iinporlant inlarketing tool for
disrrihutors for p:o~i~oriono f their owti and broadcastsrs pro:rarniiic and services. It is
undoubtedly an additional source o f revenit.: [or the dis~ribuiors.However, at the same time
if la1:ding I.CN is l~sedorlly i'or proli~otiono f program and service and ~ i o ot r plating ratctl
'I'V cliannel: this 1narke:ing tool will 11o1impinge upon l i l t accuracy atid crcdibilily o f tlie
tclevisiorr rating systclil 111 ilidia. Therefore, to ccliieve n balaiice niid to pronlole orderly
g r o ~ o~f iiie
~ i sector,
~ (he ,?i~llioriry is o f (lie view that placing rated I ' V cliarlnrls on the
la~irilngLCN shoulcl b: prohibited. 'She dis!ributors are free to run non-TRP rated 'I'V
. *. clinnnels or clippinpdtl,ailrrc ot'prog:amrnes or services oli its anding page. The broadcaster
,. ;, .
atid rile distributors ii1~1srnot u~idcrlakccarrying progrsiiiines contnitii~iywatermark I D on
tile undilig LCN. They car1 promote and advertise aboi~rtlie TRP r m d 'TV channels by
running tlie intbrniaiio~i aboai specilic orogra~nsiseriai o f sl~clichannels or Cy r r ~ i i o i ~ i g
ge~icralinformation sucli as rin~iic,logo and LCN o f sucli clia~iiielsoli la~idingpage. Tlilts,
\,ariaus iegiriinate 11li.ans are 3vaiIable for tllr brsndcasrers ant1 tile di~tribvtorsto car:) out
11irirltering for tileil- T V cli:~~inels/progl~a~nn~es a ~ i da;ri.net coiisuriers w i t h o u ~distorli~ig
telci~ision ratitig;. A3 such tliis direc~ior ivould no1 cilrtaii their legitiinate esriiiligs or
ficedom to do bt:si~iess.

Allcrnativr mrclranism hr ~iiitigatingl a l i d i l ~ gLCN afi'ccts

10) It is also pertinent to ~ i o t ehcrs tliat before arriving on decision o f putting restriction o ~ i
laiiding page, the riutliority 113s also deliberated other possible solutions for ~.esolvingtile
presenl issue. One or' sucli solutions cantemplated was to rem3ve ~ ( : einitial viewing
ilnprcssions recordcd for first few sccondslmiriutes from [lie measuremen1 system so as to
rieutralise the effect o f lantiing page. Ho\\,c~ersiich ~nodification,may lead to removal o f
gentline vicwing i~npressionsalso, and tliereforc it was found unsuitable by the Authority.
011tlir issue, \i.liether iliflue~iceill relevision ratings d i ~ eto \:Inding page can be ~nitigstcd
. -
tlirough cliatiges i n IneasilremenL ~nelhodoiogyOF televisio~irati~igs,B A R C coin~iieiitedIllat
,,,.: .
,/-,
:lie transparelit, accurate, represe~ita!ive clid credible \'icwersliip measurement methodology
addpted in India has b e t 1 1 arrived 011tlic hnsis o r gloial best prectices, slid in cons~rltarion
~virl)induslry srrikel~c~itlers. as \\;ell as regulatorigovernment ~representnrivti.To the best o f
tiieir knowledge, tl~crcis iio iiiiaSurcll?i.lit s j s ~ c iwol.dv,idt
i that detects "landiiig page" atid
reniovcs it from rel~orteddata. Accordilig 10 BARC: ally suggestion to ":haiige" tile
~neasurementinerhodolog!. witli [lie aini o! "~liitigeling" ntluelicc ol' lending page may
result in 3 nie:iiilreliielit me:liodoIog!: tliai is neither aceorate tior representarive. The impaci
on [lie i q e r eco-sysrem ; ~ o u l d be o\erall ndverse. Furtlier, B A R C has stated rhat its
ine;isurenienr iyslen! cannot distinguisi~ her~vecn a watermarked c i l a n ~ s ! ?laced on a
''landing page" or irnywliere else in disrribution platform's EPG. Placing ciian~iels on
"lnndiiig page" is a purely dis~ributionlevel activiry involving broadcasters and distribution
plati'orlr operators. It si~ggcsred tliat ally action :o control!l-egulate tiiis activit) must
tkereibrs be rake11 a! thc level o f distribcrion. Controls at the leidel oi' viewership
mcasurelncnt are nor advisable siiicc rlicy would be neitlier feasible rior practicall)
ili!~~lerrrencahlz.Therefore, colisitle~.ingall tlir tecliniccjl arid otlierasprcts, the Authorily lias
arrived at thk coiicl!isiori rllnt pl~itingrestricrim 011 Innding page at disrrihutor level is rlir
 only sui:abie a ~ l del'lt.c~iv<solu!io~i !o iliain:?i~iih? i!lrcgri~yo f llic r3tings. 'flie Atrtliori:y
may adopt a dii'krcnt spproacli, i f espsbienr o ~!he i basis o f r l ~ etecl:~~ologicaldeveloprlienrs
:n [he rating systems ill fu;ul-e.

I I ) T i e ! \ t I o r i ~ also dsIben!ed \\,ith iiateholders :ibout the fensibility o f niandoting

disrribcrors l o iiiiple~:lsiir ussr's 'lasl iisi:cd ipnge' 3s rlic lalidilig page :I] disrribulors'
nstrvorn. Tile ~!rlilo:!l!. ;rjl;cd disrrih~itorsas lo ~vliethrrtiley a1.e providing the facility o f
osr viewed plpc t2.s [Ire lal:di~lp pngc ul; IIICI n:rivorl(. Out o f tllc 60 distribi~rorsi\,ho
providzd [he dccails onl! i n o J~,tribu!ors \ . w e fuu~:d 13 bc using such feature. thereby
liil.iting 11;e acccp!abllily oCsnc!~solu:i311. On [liis issue, stakctiulders also stigyes:ed tlur ir
is ?or fcasible for thern ro ;inpIerlienr 1/12 'last visited page' as landing psge as it eniails
adilitio~inlprcciirelilcli! oi' Iiard~va~~e/so~,~iwa~.e. tilereby ~iecess~ratirlglaig: itlvesrrnri~r.Some
s!3ketloidtrs stated rliat ;Ile 'Iirsi visited page' model ll~ipiilgeson :lie ability o f distributors
to mone!ize the Ikaiure o f lznding LCS, lF!!riIitr, rile Aurhoriiy also delibcraied :he oprian oi'
lnandaling distributors :o us; l s n d i c ~psge ool: to providc platform p c c i l i c information. C n
rliis issue, sone stolceliclders c o ~ n n e n ~ e:hat d res~rictioiio f usins [he landing page only for
plntforlii sl)ecitic inlbrmaiion \i'ou d czr::ii~~lybe derl-inienral lo rhr busineis of distrihutcr.
Some slalteh3lder.s si~ggesietl[hat it \\'31lk be ill llic intel.est o f !lit! consumers il'the landing
p3gc is t~ssdonly ro provide pla!f3rm sptcific inforinotioii such as corlsuinzr careillelpiine
no~nhzr.cliargzs u f ~ ~ o r i u tscrvicei ~s prc:vitlrd by distributor and orher customer relat:d
!~lh~-mna!'o~i. 1'111: . A u i l i o ~ i ~nored
y rhnr tlierc are :iiiiltiplc ibays possible in wliich a l;ntli?g
p3p. coil bc ~itilizzl?by d i s ~ r i b [ r ~ ors ~ sad\:alicc its busilicss i~iltrcsrs.Kccping in view !lie
coinnlcnt, o f s:akc!iolderc, rile d ~ 1 1 1 0 r iisi ~OC [lie vie\v ilia! so IOPY 3s :he sanc!iry of
dudience iiicr,surci:lerlr s)s!cm is nor con!pror:~issdlsffccted by usage o f Isnbing page.
disrribruors sllould be clloived lo use l a ~ i d i ~paga i g !o fill.:her the~rcoiiimerci.4 1 inieres~s.
 BEFORE THE HON'BLE TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

BROADCASTING APPEAL ~ 0 . 0 OF
2 2018

I N THE MATTER OF:

Bennett, Cole~nangi Co. Ltd.
Having its office at:
,- 6'h Floor, Equinox Business Park,
Tower-I, off BKC, ii~nbedliarNagar,
. ,,... Kurla (West), Mulnbai-400 070

Zooln Entertainment h'etwork Ltd.

Having its office ar:
61h Floor, Equinox Business Parlc,
Tower-I, off BKC,Alnbedltnr Nagar,
Kurla (West), Mu~nbai-400070

VERSUS

Telecoln Regulatory Authority of India

Mahanaga: Doo: Sanchar Bhawan,
Ja~veharLalNehru Mar:, (Oid Minto Road)
New Delhi 1 10002

I--
AND
IN THE MATTER OF:

q$;.:,..:_;,y
DIRECTION D A T E D 03.12.2018 ISSUED BY TELECOM REGIJLATORY
,m) AUTHORITY O F INDIA ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13 READ WITH
&j
SECTION Il(l)(b)(ii) OF THE TRAI ACT. 1997.

AND

APPEAL UNDER SECTION 13(B) READ WITH SECTION 14A(2) O F THE

TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA A ~ ~ . ; 1 9 9 7

MOST RESPEFULLY SHOWETH:

I. The present Appeal is being preferred under Section l 4 B read with Section

14A(2) of the Teleco~nRegulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (as amended)

("TRAI Act"), impugning tile direction dated 03.12.2018 issued by T R 4 I ro

broadcasters under Section 13 read with Section I l(l)(b)(ii) of the i R A I

ACT, 1997. Copy of the Impugned Direction dated 03.12.2018 is annexed

herewith and ~narlteaas Annexure A

2. The rcle\.ant portion of the 11npl:gnetl Direct~on dated 03.12.2018 are

reproduced below for the sake of brc\;it!;:

"14. Morv, rherejore the u r h t ' r i : ~in~ , exercise of [he power.7

confirred upon it u17c:er :ec!io~i13, 'read wi!h rub-clause
(ii) of ciause (b) :,isub-:iecrion ill oi- seclion i i, o f the
Telrcom Regulate: Auti *.!pof India ilci, : j97 (24 o j
1997), in order to ,foIer: ,!ie inrerest ojservi :providers
and consumers and ensul-r orderly growth oJ the secJor,
direcrs a!! Sroadcasiers and distribuiors of t h ~televiiion
channels lo resircin jrom placing any registered sateiiite
television channel, vihoje TV raiing is re!eased b y TV
rofing agencji, on the landing LCN or ianding channel or
[he boot-id? screen wiih immediaie e f i c r In c(,se o/
previouily enlered cgreemei?r.s, nfortr !nay be mdde ro
i,wplemeni ilzese direelions as roof . .:i!'le and it shail
be implemenred in all cases by 31 S I ZO!O F irther
[he information of such pre-exisiing ug. :.'. v.!h ju!!
deioiis o f ihe parties lo the agreement, , errilory,
agreement period and orher rrlevanr dele::: may be
subnlitied !o (he aurhoriiy within seven days from !.he dare
of issuance of [his direcr~on ai e ~ n a i i : a d ~ b c s -
2@lrai.gov, in."

3. The present Appeal is being preferred by the Petitioner as TRAI ha:, without

any jurisdiction to issue directions on the \matte!-s whereby no Regulations or

Tariff Orders have been framed under Section l i or Section 36 of the Act,

thereby p e r ~ n i t t i ~placzl~lent
g of channels on landing page, passed a direction

under Section 13 TRAI Act read with Section I i(l)(b)(ii). Ir is stated thzt

TRAI car. only involte the power under Section I3 of the Act to enforce a

regulation or a tariff order forlnu~ated in accordance with the procedure

provided in law i.e the T U I Act. In the case in hand, przhibiting the MSO

or the broadcaster to display or exhibit the channel as per their own liking or

as per the terms of the agreement is per se :Ilegal and any directiocs to do so is

also illegal. Ir is, tl!us, clear that TRAI, without application of mind, arbitrarily

and without having regard to the extant Regulations, has directed the

broadcasters and the d~stributorsof telev~slorichannels to restrain from placing

any registered satellite television channel, whose T V rating is released by T V

rating agency, on the landing LCli or landing channel or boot up screen with
 irninediate effect fronl the date of issuance of the impugned direction, without

considering that there is no such prohibition ill the Regulations

4. That the Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are companies incorporated under the

Colnpanies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Times o f India Building,

Dr. D.N. Road, Murnbal-400 001. The Appellants operate their televis~on

business f r o ~ nits office at Tirnes House, 7, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New

Delhi - 110 003 and also at 6"' Floor. Equlnox Business Park, Tower-I, off

BKC, A~nbedkar Nagar, Kurla (West), Murnbai-400 070, and own and

operate, and are engaged in the business of' broadcasting various channels such

as 'Tiines No\r.', 'Tiines NOWHD', 'Movies Now'l ET Now', 'Rolnedy Now',

fin,
.,; ,;
,I., I . .
,d
'Rornedy Norv HD', 'Movies Now HD', ' W X , MNX
'MN+, HD', 'Mirror

Now', 'zooin'(hereinafter referred to as the "Channels"). Appellant are

telecasting its channels in India for more than 20 years and the channels of the

Appellant are popular, have very wide reach and have great dernand

throughout the country. The ?ippelIa~~tsbeing a Broadcaster within the

,q;,
./. definition as contelnplated under the Interconnect Regulations is directly,

malirially and adversely being affected by the Impugned Direction issued by

L;
the Respondent, and thus, is a service provider.
2$!
u,
5. That the Respondent- TRAI is the statutory body constituted and established

under the T e l e c o ~ ~Regulatory

i Authority of India Act, 1997 ("TRAI Act"), It

is submitted that the Impugned Direction has been notified by the Respondent,
in exercise of its powers conferred upon i r under Section 13 read with Section

I l(l)(b)(ii) of the TR4i Act: 1997. whereby the Respondent has sought to

restrain the broadcasters and the distributors o f T V channels from placing any

registered satellite ~elevisionchannels whose T V rating is released by T V

rating agency, on the landing LCN or landing channel or boot up screen, by

assuming such powers and authority suo /nolo conferred upon itself which are

not either expressly or irnpliedly given to the Respondent by the TRAI Act.
6. That the Impugned Direction is liable to be struck down as being absurd,

arbitrary, illegal, perverse and contrary to the provisions of the TRAI Act. The

Impugned Direction are also violative of Article 19(1)(a) and 19(l)(g) of the

Constitution of India as they interfere with the Appellant's freedom to carry on

its business.

7. Brief Facts leading to tile filing of the present Appeal are 2s follows:

i. On 23.03.1997, The Government of India pro~nulgated the Teleco~n

Reg~ilatoryAuthority of India Act, 1997 with an objective to regulate the

telecom~nunicarionservices, adjudicate disputes, dispose of the appeals

and to protect the interest of the service providers and consumers of [he

telecoln sector.

ii. On 24.01.2000, the TRAI Act was amended and a proviso was added to

Section I3 of the Act which stated that TRAI could not issue any

direction under Section 12(4) or under Section 13 of the Act except on

inatters specified in Section I l(l)(b) of the Act. Post this amendment, the

Respondent does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes and further,

Section 13 of the TRAI .Act restricts the power of the TRAI to pass

directions only for tile matters contained in Section 1 l(l)(b) of the TRAI

Act i.e. for inatters which have been deliberated under Section I l(l)(b)

and a RegulaiioniTariff Order has been passed by TRAI, Section 13 can

be used to enforce that RegulationiTariff Order or its violation.

.,.
111. The Ministry of Infonnation and Broadcasting issued a letter dated

24.08.2017 to Broadcasting Audience Research Council calling upon it to

stop generating ghe ratings of such TV channels, which are either being

retransmitted on dual LCN under differently genres simultaneously or 011

single LCN on landing pagelchannel. Copy of the MIB's letter dated

24.08.2017 is arlilexed herewith and ~narltedas Annexure B.

 iv. The Respondent cal!ed a ineetingon 20.09.2017 ot'all the staiteholders on

retransmission of TV channels on dual LCNs.

v. In furtherailce of the meeting held on 20.09.2017, tne Appellant sent its

confirmation vide 1et:er dated 26.39.201 7 to tne Respondent that all its

channel5 are being retransmitted only on single LCN and under tneir

respective genres as declared by it in co~npliancewith the extant the

TRAI Regulations. Copy o i the Appellant's letter dated 26.09.2017 is

annexed herewith and inarlted as Annexure C.

vi. The Respondect exercising its powers under Section 13 read with Section
,&,:..L3, ,.
I)
1 i(l)(b)(ii) of TRAl Act issued [he d i r e c t i o ~datcd
~ 08.1 1.2017 (erstwhile

Direction) relating to display of TV channeis on landing LCNs. Vide the

said directior,, tlie Respondent directed that all broadcasters and

distributors of TV channels shall restrained from piacing any registered

satellire televisio~?cliannel, u.hosc TV rating is released by Tt' rating

agency, on the landing LCN or landing channel or boot up screen within

- fifteen days the date of issuance of the said ilotice. Copy of TRAl's

direction dated 08.1 1.2317 is annexed herewith and marked as A n n e r u r e

D.

vii. The direction datzd 08.1 !.2017 was challenged by the Appellants in B.A.
...
No. I of 2017 before this hon'ble Tribunal. This Hon'ble Tribunal, on

22.1 1.2017 directed thzt tlie parties shall maintain status quo in the

matter. The rnattcr was heard by this Hon'ble Tribunal on [he preliminary

issue of Section 1 l(4) oTTRA1 Act and co~nplinncewith the require~nents

of transparency, and: orders were reservi-d on 08.03.2018. Copy of

Broadcasting Appeal No. 1 of 2617 is annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure E. Copy of the reply filed by TRAI is annexed herewith and

marked as A l ~ n c x u r eF. Copy of the rejoinder filed by the Appellant

 I
s2-
hereir in B A . No. I o f 2017 is annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure G . Ccpy cf the Order dated 22.1 1.2017 passed by TDSAT in

B.A. no. 1 of 2017 is annexed Ilerewith and lnarlted as Annesure H

viii. On 09.03.2015, TRAI informed this lion'ble Tribunal that the direcion

dated 08.1 1.2917 is under considei-ation ibr withdrawal and accordingly,

requested that the orders ma) not he passed for a period of four weeks

Copy of the Order dated 09.03.2018 passed by TDSAT in B.A. no. 1 of

2017 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure I.

ix. On 03.04.2015:TRAI issued the Consultation Paper on issues relating to

$!!;p!
/f7'
L, placing of TV cl~annelson landing page. This fact was infonned to the

Hon'blr Tribunal on 18.04.2018. Ir was further informed that the earlier

direction dated 08.1 1.2317 is decided to he withdrawn and a for~nalorder

of withdrawal is liltely ro be issued in two weeks' time. Copy of the

Consultation Paper dated 03.03.2018 is anfiexed heremith and marked as

. -
.. :.,.
t.... x. On 20.0420 IS, the Appellanki he;eiii submitted their response to the
.
I_,.:..,
.,<:.,.;;
.,... ,.

( :>
, .,,
Consultation Paper dated 03.OJ.iOiS on issues relating to placirlg of TV
qi,

channels or, landing page. Copy of the response filed by thc Appellant

herein to the Consultation Paper dated 03.04.2015 is annexed here:vi:h

and ~narlted as A n ~ ~ e x u rKe. Different slake holae7s tiled their own

responses to the Consultation Paper and took different posi:ions. I t is

stated that there were in total 25 responses filed other than by the

Ap?e!lants, copies of ~ l ~ i are

c h nct b e ~ n gfled herewith, lhowever, tile

same are being filed as additional documents. which may be taken on

record
 xi. On 25.04.2018, TRAI withdreu. the direction dated 08.1 :.2017. Copy of

the TRAI's direction dated 25.04.20 IS is annexed lierewith and ~narked

as Annexure L.

xii. On C3.12.2018 TRAI also issued Consultation Paper dated 03.12.201 8

titled "Review of Television Audie!ice Measi~relnent and Rat!ngs in

Indiz", which is annzxed herexith and lnarlted as A ~ ~ n e x u rM.

e Certain

relebant paras are zdded having bearing on the present case:

"3. I The imporiance and need/+ a credible, :ransparent and

representaiive ielevisio~l audiecce measurement sysrem is
recognized !he worid over. Conrinunnce wiih a n inadequate
lelevision ruling system ~ i i hamper
l ihe growih o/TV indusfry as
financial decisions; production ojprogramtne and its scheduling
are lcrge/;o influenced by [elevljion ratings.

3.2 The A ~ l h o r i i y whiie framing its recommenda~ions on

"Guidelines/Accrediiation Mechanisin for Teievision Rating
Agencies in India daied 13ln Sepiernber 2013, observed ihai :he
"

prevaiiing television rcling: carried oui by Mls TAM Media

Research hud cerlain dejciencies as pointed oui by several
siakeho1dei.s. The major concerns were relafed io credibrlify and
neulrality of TI' raiings arising due lo cross-hoiding beiween the
rating agencies and broadcaslers, odvi?rfisers and advertising
agencies: disclosures by ihe rating ngencies; non-transparent
~nelhodology;inadequate sample size eic. The Authority was of
the ~ i e wthnf these issues can be ejjectively addressed by putting
in place a proper reguiatory pamework and st@ulaiing
appropriate guidelinesjor television rating agencies.

3.3 The A~cii7orilj~noied that in souniries like Ausirciia,

Canada, Frailce, !reland South Africa, UK and USA, :he
teievision iatiizg sysieiils were 11:anaged through a seif-
regu!aior)i tnodei, liz the seif-reguialion tnodei, rhe onus for
credibiliiy and o~cuiac!: of raiings vesied in :he concerned
siakeholders - [he broadcasiers, advertisers and advertising
agencies- whose business is m a i n 4 aflecfed by !he ieievision
ratings. A proper s e ~ r e g u l c ~ o r model
y having adequate
representation horn all concerned stakeholders, 'could h e l , ~in
ensuring fhat no individuai section of [he indusfrj has majority
confrol (and hence injluence) on decisions as these would be
coliecfive. This could be a way of mifigafing fhe conjlicl o j
inherent issues fhaf arise when the rating agency is dominuled
by one particular group

3.j Furlher, ihe Au~hority was o! the vrew tho1 [he

shortcomings ill be r e c t ~ j e dirrespeciive
ihe rcting sys:em Iind io
ofwhether rhe rating is tinderiakerl by either BARC or by an
 54
independen! ruling agencj, In the absence o f a framework, a
raiing agency could coniinue io operaie wi!houi addressing [he
shor!comi17gs Thus, rhe Aurhoriry was of the view rho! a
fiame~uor.k,in ihejorm ojguideli~zeslo be no!(fied by MiB, /or
junctioiling and i~z017itori~g ~f ielevision rating agencies was
required ro ensure genei.aiion of credible and [ransparent
ralings, ilccordingly, /he Aulhcrify reccn~~nended comprehensive
guidelines /or regisiralion o/ raiing agencies which covered
eiigibiliiy norms, cross-hoidb7gs, rnethodo!ogy, complain!
redressal, sale & use o/ rulings, audii, disclosure, reporiing
requiremenrs andpenolprovisionsjor rating agencies.

3.12 i n India, >ARC is (he sole orgunizarion which gaihers

and publishes audience measuretneni daia w i ~ hthe help o/
meowrrmeni iechniques adopied globally with on objeciive fo
have fair iaifng o j a l ! TV channels. BARC uses a people-rneier,
namely BAR-o-Meier /or collecrion o j viewership daia. Audio
!4'a!ermcrkbig iechnology embeds audio wa!ermarks in i~ideo
Dropramme prior io upload and broadcasl. Tlzese watermarks
ore no! audible /o [he human ear, bui can easiij, be de!ec!ed and
decoded using dedicared hardware or sojiware. The woiermark
is broadcasted along iuirh the program. ,4s viewing details are
recorded hy [he BAR-0-rdeiers, so are [he waiermarks. The raw
data is cleaned, merged w'iih the channel, program, language
and broadcas! scheaule details. Universe Es!imares are applied
io gei viewership dara. This gives programme owners
unprecedenied visibiliiy inro when and where [heir pro,oramme is
broadcosi, who has vlewed ii, elc. As iize waiermark is par! o/
[he prograin, a r y aiieinpi lo desooy or rerno'ie ii will also ru/n
the qua!i!ji o/!he nza!ericl in ivhich i! is embedded.

3.13 Waiermark iechnology- BAR-0-Merer capfures TV usage,

TV sraiion ide~i:ijicaiionand individual viewing [hrough the use
o j nuo digiial devices, one insialled b j [he broadcasier
(Einbedder) at siaiion head erd/:rans~izission site(lj and !he
oiher device, relerred io as [he " B A R - 0 - Meier" ihai is insialled
on each TV se! in !he panel household.

3.;4 Embedder eqiiipineni is placed ai ihe Broadcasier's

headend where [he Channel signa! rransrnission begins. The
device embeds a unique iva~ernzarked code in !he audio
componen! o j !he program ~uorkjlow.This code consisis o j :he
Channel ID & ihe time siamp. Each channel has iis own unique
code (or codes, in case ihe channel has taken a back-up). Once
[he unique ivarermark 1Ds are genrraied and assigned !o each
broadcasi station cooperating wiih BARC lizdia, /he ernbedder is
in~ialledci [he broadcasier 's headend lransmission site and a
special station spec$c elecironic card is inseried. The resulfs in
[he embedder con!inuouslyplac~ngc iinze srcmped channel name
and ;volermark ID ir: the s!a!ion's program workflow. The
 watermark is an ;naudible audio code made available to TV
broadcasiers [hat subscribe lo nnd support the BARC India
measvrenwnt of TV audiences A master l i s ~o f TV Slation
iVatermarked IDS is stored on !he BARC India server and
dow~doaded to BAR-0-Meters joi- :he identification nnd
n~easure~izen!
ojTVSralion viewing

3. iS Ecch meter sysiem co17sis1so f a main tin):, a dispioy unii

and probes iAai jor BAR-0-Meters cap:ure ihe audio orilput o j
ihe TV set Each main unit is equipped wirh a microprocessor
and a modem. The main unit is piaced near rite Ti/ sel being
measured in the pane! household. Each main unit has a probe
attached ro it thar is either placed near the TV set or connected
!o the line or audio out o f : h e TI/ The probe caplure the ideniii);
,of each tuned TV signal a n d f i e d s (his information to the main
unit where ir is time stamped and stored for transmission as
viewing events to BARC India cenrra! site collection servers
assigned to BAR-0- Meter.

3.16 The TV sei m e i e r i ~ gsystems con/inuous!y and passively

caplures TV viewing evei7:s in real time, recording rhe tlme and
duroiion of channel tuning evet~isand capluring rhe viewership
even!s o f individuai inerizbers ages 2+ !hat have pressed [heir
viewer ID button to conjirn~their presence in the audience. The
main unit siores rhe individual rime siamped evenrs in memory
jor transmission ro iize BARC lndia server at prederermined
inrervals /hroughou/ rhe viewing day. The BAR-0-Meler 71'
viewing even! dara is the11 received by BARC India collecrion
server where collected TV event data cre s~mu1:oneouslybacked
up and ~izadeavailabie to pre-processing sofmare.

3.17 Daiu collectedjiorn the meters is in seconds. However, in

keeping ivirh inierna1io17aistandards, cl! vc!ida!ions rules are on
viewing sessions (biocks o f tbne o f TV Set on in the HH -
Tuning; and of each individual viewing TI; - Viewing) and
reporred dura is in cloci: minures. Hence, ail dart needs to be
converted to clock minuies ji.e. H.Y:MM/orma!, e.p. 12:00:00 io
12:01:00, i2:01:00 lo 1?:02:00 and so on).

3. i8 Indi,iiduol viewing sessions within a ciock minure: For

BAR-0-Me!er measured TV sets there are ru!es=.appiied io'rhe
evenrs lhar atfribule viewing to one and only one TV channe1,Cor
an entire clock minule. Only one channe! is eligible io receive
viewing credit for each ciock minute ~ h r o u g l ~ o[he
u / viewing day,
/ / a n individual is viewing a TV channeljor 30 seconds or more
in a clock minute, rhe rules are struighrforword and viewing is
at!ribu/ed io that channeifor !he entire clock minute. The rules
becorne nMre co~nplexwhen vjewing auring a clock minute
involves inultiple char~nelsjora toial o f 3 0 or more seconds. The
pre-processed minute ievel dara is (ken subjected lo further
r;;. i ' 1' . . .$,,. ~ .,, ,a/;.'- 7 - . :'. , .:, :
~, \
 deier~niizes[he accuracy ofslalisiical exercise. Tile panel size
shouid be representalive o f age, socio-economic class, gender,
working slams, delivery plaforms and geographlca! coverage
(borh urban & rura! rrarkeis)

3.23 The policy guidelines /or leievision raring agencies has

rhefollowing provisions regarding pane; size:

" j . 3 . j A minilnun7 panel size o f 2 0 , GOO 10 be implementea'

wiihin 6 rnonihs of rhe guidelines colrling inlo force.
Thcreafier, the pcnel s i x shall be increased by 10,000
every year ~inrili'/ reacizej il12 figure of50,000 The pane!
o f homes has io renzaiil i.eprese~liative of all relevision
households in the couizriy. "

3.24 As per ~rz/armaiioi~avuiiabie, by ih2 end .of2015, BARC

had ailairled 2 panei size o f 2 2 1 0 0 bul ns per ihe provisions o j
po!icy guidelines, panel size should have reaching 50000 by the
end of 2018. However, as per informarlon available BARC is
expecled lo achieve a pane! size of 44000 by the end o f 2 0 1 8 .
Wfrh such s~nallpanel size, if beconzes really diijicult ro predic~/
es!ablish :rue ineasxremen; dara, especially, for p country of
aboui 1.3 billion people along rvirh diversiiy.

3.25 S~nallerpanel size rcsulis in 1in:iled darn for analysis and

iherejore is noi truly represeniaiive, wlziclz compromises the
uccuracy o f the findings Con!rary, c larger pcnel size would
certainly i ~ n p r o ~rohustizess
~e and give more weighlagelvalue to
iizeasurernenl ratii7g Bui larger panel size comes with a higher
cost ar~d logisrics. The cosi would have io be borne by the
slakeholders who inay nor be 57 a position ro irJuse such costs.
This poses a signl/icanr challenge."
,:: : xiii On 3.12.2018, TRAI issusd the Impugned Direction, which is not
I,.
. .
'h

'@I per~nissibleBy virtue of tile I ~ n p i ~ g n eDirec~lon,

d TRAI has restrained
II the broadcasters aad the distributor. of TV channels from placing any

registered satellite TV channels whose rv rating is released by TV raring

agency, on the landing LC19 or landii~gchannel or the t o o t up screen with

immediate effecl.

8. That the Impugned Direction passed by !he Respondent is not sustainable and
'
is liable to be struck down and quashedon various, inter-alia, groundswhich
 THERE IS COMPLETE NL N-APPLIC 10X O F MIND AKD THUS<
VIOLATION OF SECTION 11f419b1T1 I&TRAI ACT

A. BECALSE :he principl~,sa< cnsbrined under S e c : ~)n 1 l(4) ro ensure

transparencq wli~leexercising i t ; powers and disch,.rglng its functions

have not been follo\ved: '.I - i11 ! ~ c has T U I . while notifying the

Impugned Dil.ection does not a?F ,i its mind, nor does i t consider the

entire g a n ~ u tof colniilelits and i,ie7.vs expressed I [he Stakeholders

There are as Inany as 25 responses received by TR41, and TRAI in

passing1no:ifying the impugned direction con\iti. ! s jilch rt >onses i c h

are favourab!e ro its view 2nd does not provide a rl 'roning as to I! the

~iei*,of o:her stakeholders is not correct. In fac the reason ..vhy this

Hon'ble Tribunal did not pass an o:.l!;.r on le ..sue " tran~parency

under Section I l(4) TRA! .4ct, in l3roadc;isting Aplxal I\ . 1 o f 20 I ? is

that T U l ~indertook,while withdrawing the ersrivhilc Pirvction to

recons~derthe same. Hence, while reconsidering the directic:~. T"AI

ought to have applied its ~ n i n dafresh

B.
.
Because T W 1 is not required to simply pass directions, without

analyzing the c o ~ n ~ n e n of
t s the stakenolders in detail, ;bus, displaying

non-application of mind

C. Because Section i l(4) of TRAl Act reads as under:

" i I i 4 ) The Authori~yshall ensure tiansparency while exercising

irs powers and discharging ifsfinctions" -.
.

D. Because the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of COAl Vs. i"R.41,

(2O!Gj 7 SCC 703 has held :hat rile TRAI nust act as per Section 1 l(4)

of TRAI Act and held as under:

"86. The quesfion oJ {rcnspcrency rcises a more fundamen:al

ques.'ion, nan:e/y ihor of openness in governance. IVe ,find ihar the
,1 , ', .. .

__
D ' .
1 . :ti<., . .. ?C 'c .,g .,:. ,' P,9 $,'>,c .. ?+befi
, .;ci?~,~ .G:..:'i:, :.:I: ,. ~ .,jj ; e ::a .,
il.
; . -
~ , ~ . :.
. - 'G ;;. ,.. ... ,... .; ;.,,; ,.,. . - , , ;- i.,
, , .,:- .. . I^ . . . ?L
, . //i.

c*ri,;ip;ic;:;
. . . .
&,<.; ,:G,;S I . ;I " :...:
. .
,- . ,., ,, . .<:.,
:., . :
, ~ -..,.,'?-': '7
 accountable lo the people of India The Prean~blero [he said Acr, in
ringing lerms, slales:

" o/ India has eslablished democralic

... Whereas the Coi~sti~ution
Republic;

And whereas democracy requires an informed citizenry and

!ransparency of informarion which are viral !o irs/uncrioning and also
10 conrain corrup~ion and !a hold Governmenrs and !heir
inslrui~~en!ai~ties
accoun~able10 !he governed;

And whereas revelarion of infor~narionin acrual pracrice is likely 10

conflic! with orher public inieresrs including efjicien! operarions o f t h e
govern men!^, oprimum use o f limited fiscal resources and the
preservarion ofconjide17rial1ryofsensiIive in/orrna!ion;

And whereas i! is necessarj ro harmonise these conjiicling inleresrs

lu11ilepreserving [he parninountcv o/llle d e m o c ~ a l i cideal;

flow, iherejbre, ii .iS expedieni io provide ,br jurnishing certain

i1l/orinarioi7 ro ciri;eils who desire lo have il."(emphasis supplied)

92. !Ve find rhar, subjecr 10 cerrain well-dejined exceprions, ir

would be a healrhy funcrioning of our democracy if all subordinare
legisla!ion were ro be "transparen! in !he manner pointed our above.
"

Since i! is beyond ihe scope o f h i s judgmenr ro deal with subordinare

legisia~iongenerally, and in parricuiar wirh siatues which provide/or
rule making and regularion making wi!hou! any added requiremen! o f
rransparency, we would exhort Parliamen! io rake up [his issue and
jratne a legisla~ion along !he lines o f !he US Adminisrrarive
Procedure Acr (wirh cerrain well-dejined excep/ions) by which all
subordinare legislalion is subject ro a transpareni process by which
due consuliaiions with all srakeholdeis are held, and the rule or
regularion-making power is exercised aJer due consideration o/ all
srakeholders' submissions, rogerher with an explanaiory
memorandum which broadly rakes inlo accounr what !hey have said
and !he reasons /or agreeing or disagreeing wirh !hem, Nor only
would such iegislarion reduce a/-birrariness in subordinare
legisla~ion-,nuking, bur it would also conduce 10 openness in
governance. It would aiso ensure !he redressal, parrial or olherwise.
o/grievances o f r h e slakeholders concerned prior ro [he making o f
subordinare legisla(ion, This would obviate, in m;ny cases, !he need
f i r persons io approach courls ro strike down subordinale legislarion
on rhe ground a/ such legislarion being ~nanijiesrly arbirrary or

9-1. The jinding o/rhe High Courr ihal a iranspareni process was
followed by TRAl in inaking [he iinpugned Regularion is only parrly
correcr. b1;hile ii is ii.ue illar all stakeholders were consulied, bur
unforrunarely nothing is disclosed as ro why service providers were
incorrecr when !hey said rho! call drops were due ro various reasons,
some ofwhich cannoi be snid 10 be because o j ~ h e f a u i o! f i h e service
providela. Indeed, [he Regula!ion in assuming !hat every call drop is a
dejiciency o f service on [he par! o f [he service provider, is plainly
incorrect."
E. Because considering the aforesaid interpretation, TRA! has come to a

conclusion as under:

(i) That the direction is being' issued in Public Interest as

Broadcasters are getting additional viewership zs a result of

defauli placement done by the distributor, thereby resulting in

non-level playing field among broadcasters.

(ii) While the TKAI accepts that landing page is an important

~narketingtool, at the same tirne, holds that due to i l l effects on

TRP, using the landing page thereby jeopardizes the accuracy and

the credibility o f T V ratlng sys:eln.

(iii) Issue of change in measurement ~nethodologyof television ratings

to ~nitigatethe influence of landing LCN on television ratings is

not possible. TRAI, at the same time, issued a consultation paper

on 3.12.2018, calling for colnlnents in respect of change in

~nethodology.This shows complete lack of application of mind.

(iv) Unilaterally came to the conclusion that alternatives are not

technically feasible or impact their co~n!nercialinterests.

(v) That LCN is not a natural choice of the viewer thereby causing

undue distortion.

(vi) Average time talten on the landing page is 43 seconds, which has
-..
no basis.

Without assigning any reason or applying its mind, analyzing data to

show that by putting channels on the landing page, it affects T W of

televisionchannel, and further affects the choice of the custoiner. There

is no data or analysis by TRAI as to how the aforesaid is true while the

fact is that T W is calculated by an authority called BARC, which places

its bar-o-meter in random homes on PAN India basis. Thus, the reading
 is based on such sample homes, and not on the entire T V watching

universe.

F. Because the TRP ratings are a measure of consulner preferences and not

the basis of consuiner preferences. The TRP is only relevant for an

advertiser and has nothing to do with tlie consumer and this can be easily

ascertained by the fact that a normal consumer does not subscribe to the

reports on TRP. There is no study which suggests that TW has any

influence on consulner viewing; rather it is a tool for generating

advertisement by the Broadcasters. The consuiner is not bothered about

which channel is coining first or last and it sees only that channels which

the consulner wishes to watch. Therefore placing T V Channels on

landing LCN cannot distort T V ratings and neither does it restrict

consumer choice.

G. Because the basis why landing LCN does not distort consuiner choice is

that a consuiner is not required to stay on the landing LCN and the

electronic progralnlne guide allows tlie consuiiier to seamlessly navigate

to tlie channel of rhe consun~er'schoice The choice of the consumer to

remain and continue lo ~vatcli landing LCN contents is as much an

informed choice as a choice to su~itch to a channel. Indeed, if the

consumer does not lilte the content on the landing LCN then he always
.~

has the clioice and ability to go to any other channel. Much like the first

page of a newspaper, if the consuiner is not interested by the content of

the channel on the landing LCN, he will turn to another LCN. Therefore,

the underlying factor is the choice of thc consulner to view the channel.

The landing LCN is just a medium to advertise the content to the

consuiner with the option to f l ~ pthe channel or to stay on the landing

LCN
H. In facr, the entire TV rating measuremellt process itself provides

adequate safeguards on [lie TV rating process. The entire process of

collection of TV rating data is briefly represented below in a step flow

chart (Source: BARC)

Step 1

Idetzi~j7caiionof a sample location: The first step involves identification

of a geographic area for the purposes of selecting sample households, for

collection o f T V viewership data.

Step 2

Seleclion and iraitling: The nexl step involves the identification and

selection of households. Once a house is selected, the members are

explained the purpose of the rating process and their consent is talten for

registration with :he rating agency. Infor~nation of the household is

collected vide a questionnaire.

Step 3

insia/iariot~of equipmeni: In the selected households, special equipment

such as a meter is connected to the TV and a button pushing relnote

handheld device is provided The handheld device has buttons made

available for nssignment to household members who are asked as part of

their panel participation to press their assigned buttons when they are

viewing TV. Separate buttons on the remote handheldddevice are reserved

for children below 2 years, guests etc. The rne~nberof the household are

training regarding viewing butt011 pressing etc, and are fully informed

about the rating process. The TV set ~netering system captures the

viewership events of individual members aged 2+ years that have pressed

their viewership ID button to confir~n'theirpresence in the audience.

Step 4
 Attribution of vieivership io a channel: Viewership is calculated on a

'clock-minute' basis. T!ie viewerstlip of a channel in a clock-minute is

attributed to on channel only. I f an individual views a T V channel for 30

seconds or inore, tlie viewership of that channel gets attributed to that

channcl in tlie clock-intnute. However, if there are lnultiple channels

viewed in a clock-minute. for different durations then the viewing is

attributed to [tie channel with tlie maximum duration of viewing

However, where there are channels with the same lnaxi~nuln viewing

duration, the channel with that spills o\:er into the next clock ininute gets

the viewing attributed to it. In the event none of the T V channels with the

same maximum viewing duration spills over to the next clock-minute,

then the-viewership is attributed to any one of such channels at random.

Step 5

Collection ofdata in the collection server: The T V viewing event data are

then received by the rating agency's collection server where collected T V

event data are simultaneously backed up and made available to pre-

processing software.
,;.!',:
,......
w..:..'- :
,??:
,s.::.: TRAl DOES NOT HAVE THE JURISDICTION T O ISSUE THE
<;:
IMPUGNED DIRECTION

I. BECAUSE The Impugned Direction is issued without jurisdiction in so

far as the Impugned Direction has been passed in a colorable exercise of

the powers under Section 13 read with Section 1 l(l)(b)(ii) of the TRAI

Act, which specifically lists out the powers upon which the Respondent

can passlissue directions.

Section 13 of TRAI Act is reproduced below for the sake of brevity:

"13. P o ~ w rof Aull~orilyloissrle direclions

The authority may, for the discharge of its functions

under sub-section ( I ) o/seciion 11, issue such directions
/ram time to time to ihe service providers, as it may
consider necessary:
 [PROVIDED that no direction under sub-seciion /4) of section
I2 or m d e r thir secrion shail be issued except on rhe molters
spec~jiedin clause (b) ofsub-section ( I ) ofseclion I I . ] "
Section i l ( l ) ( b ) of the TRAI Act is reproduced below for the sake of

[(!) Noohvi~i~standinganything contained in the Indian Telegraph

Acl, 1995 (13 c f 1 8 8 j ) . tile function ofthe Authorify shall be to -

(6) Discharge [hefollorvingfunctions namely.

Ensul-e compliance ofierms and conditions of licence;

iliotwrthstanding anylhing contained in the terms and
condiiions of ihe licence granled before [he
commencement of the Teiecom Regulatory Authoriiy of
India (Amendment) Act, 2000,fix :he terms and condition
o f i ~ t e -r connec;ivitj. b e t ~ e e n[he service providers;
Ensure iechni'cal compatibility and efective inter-
connection berween dijerent service providers:
Regulale arrangemeni crmongsr service providers of
sharing their revenue derived frotn providing
telecon?municatioi~services,
Lay-down [he standard of quality of service to be
provided by the rervice providers and ensure the qltalily
o f service and conduct the periodical survey of such
service of such service provided by the service providers
so as to protect interesi of (he consumers of
lelecommunicar~onservice;
(i'ij Lay-down and ensure the rime period for providing local
.. . .,. .. and loxg distance circuits of telecom~nunicationbetween
,

:;>.!
..
vi..:..
I<,!,,,.
I,.!
d f l e ~ e n service
t pyoviders;
.u,,,
(vii) Mointain regis~ero/inter-connect agreemenfs and of all
s u c i ~oiher matters as may be provided in the regulations;
(biii) Keep regislei. ~nainlained iiilder clause (vii) open /or
inspection !o any nrembei ajpubiic on payment o/such
jee and compliance ojsuch other requiremeni as may be
-.
provided in the regulaiions;
Ensure efective con~pliance o f universal service
obligations; "

I. BECAUSE the Impugned Direction has been issued purportedly to

protect the interest of the service providers and consumsrs. I t is

submitted that the conjoint reading of Section I l(l)(b) and Section 12(3)

of the TRAI Act, ivould highlight the fallacy cn the face of the Impugned

Direction that no interes;, either of rhz service provider or [he subscriber,

is being protccted by way of the Impugned Direction

 I
K. BECAUSE the Impugned Direction fails to explain at all as to how the

issuance of tile Impugned Direclion would fall within the jurisdiction

conferred Jpon TRAI to discharge its ftnctions under Section 1 l(1) of

the TRAI .4ct.

L. BECAUSE a direction under Section I3 has to be issued only for the sole

purpose of iinple~nentatianof rights as has been the consistent exercise

understanding of the authoriry on the lnanner of exercise of such powers,

which can only be done by making Regulations under Section 36 of the

Ait, which ad~nittedlyhas not been done in the present case

M. BECAUSE no such purported direclion can be issued ~n the garb of a

direction and not Regulation, which has to laid before the Parlia~nentin

terms of Section 37 of the Act for appropriate sanctioning of the same.

N. BECAUSE the Impugned Direction is being issued by placing reliance

upon the provisions which speak otherwise, and hence is illegal, arbitrary

and is liable to bz struck down with iiilniediate effect.

0. BECAUSE the Impugned Direc:ion is a fraud on its power as the same is

sn attempt at over reaching the rule of law, which b.as been blatantly

ignored by the authority.

P. BECAUSE the Impugned Direction betrays a complete lack of

applica~ior~of mind and de:iberation in issuing a direction ro the

broadcaster, by assuming jurisdiction, which is absent, rendering the

Impugned Direction ~nanifestlyarb~trarya r d unreasonable

Q. BECAUSE Section 13 provides for enfo:cemenl of the function

stipulated under Section I I of TIWI Act. In the case iri hand, there is

notiling i n the regulations or tariff orders that prohibits placing channels

on the landing page so long as the channel appears in the same genre as

that declaredby the broadcaster.

TRAI HAS INDIRECTLY AMENDED THE REGULATIONS BY WAY

O F THE IMPUGNED DIRECTIONS. WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE
 R. It is settled law that whzt cannot be done directly ought not to be done

indirectly. 111respect of the l~npugnedDirection, the Authority has issued

a direction under Section 13 TRAl Act, and prohibited landing page

placeinenl, which otherwisz is per~nissible under the Interconnect

Regulations of 20C4, 2012, and 2017. l'hcs, the result is that the

Impugned Direction, indirectly, amends tile Regulations, which has a

statutory force, as the s a ~ n eare placed before the Parlia~r~entunder

Section 3' of TRAI Act. Thus, TRAI is not justified in issuing a

d~section under Section 13, which results in amending or prohibiting

sornething, which is othenvise nor prohibited under the Regulations. This

leads an anomaly and such an action by the Authority should be

deprecated. Thus, on this count as well, the Impugned Direction is liable

to be set aside.

DELEGATION NOT PERMISSIBLE

S. That by virtue of issuing the impugned direction, the TRAl has virtuaily
- - delegateo its power to male regulation under Section 36 read with

Section 1 l(l)(b) of the TRAI .Act to the ExecutiveiOfficials of TRAI,

which is not perinissiile. Furthermore, as per Section 37 of the TRAI

Act, all Rules and Regulations has to be placed before the Parliament for

ratification. By passing the impugned direction, the T f i I has aiso done

away with th: said requirement which is a grave contravention of Section

37 of TR41 Act

T That Sections 36(1) and 37 of the TRAI Act reads as under:

"36 Power ro ~ n a k erepulafions. - (1) The Auihority

consisrenr with [his
mmi, b>l noiification, make re.p~!laiions
& and the rule n?a&_ihereuncier lo carry oui [he
purposes o f [his act^

37, Rules and repulalions to be laid before

Parlia,nenf. - Everv rule and every repulaiibn made
under lhir Act shail be laid, as soon as may be afier ir4
 inade, before each House o f Parliameni, while it is in
session, for a iofal oeriod o f !hirip davs which mav be
comprised in one session or in two or more successive
sessions, and it: before [he exnirv o f the session
i~llmedia~eiyfo11ow~n.e rile session or !he successive
session aforesaid, hoih Houses arree !ha! the rule or
iepuia~ionshould no! be made, !he rule or reg.ula!ion
shaii ihereafler have effect oniv in such modified form or
he o f n o efkcr, as ihe case nlav he: so, however, !ha! an?
sucl~ inodificarion or ai~nulmeni shail be wiihoui
prejudice io ihe validiiv o f anything ureviously done
under ihor rule or reg.ula~ion."

U. In this regard, the Appellants rely upon the judgment of BSNL Vs. TRAI,

2014 (3) SCC 222, wherein the Hon'bie Supreme Court held as under:

" 8 9 We nlay now adveri lo Seciion 36. Under sub-Seclion (1)

!hereof !he Aulhorip can make regulalions lo carry out [he
purposes o j the Act spec$ed in various provisions o/ !he
Ac! including Secrions I!, 12 and 13. The exercise o f
power finder Section 3611) is hedged wiih ihe condirion
rhar (he regulaiions inu.rr be consisienl w i ~ hihe ACIand the
Rules made thereunder. There is no orher res!ric!ion 011 rile
power o f !he Au~horily!o inake reguiaiions. In lerms o f
Secrion 37, the reguiario17s are required !o he laid bejore
Parliomen! which can eilher approve, modijj, or annul the
same. Section 36/21, which begins wi!h !he words "without
prejudice 10 the generalily of [he power under subsec!ion
(1)" specijies various lopics on which regu1alion.r can be
mode by !he Auihorily. Three o/ these ropics relale. to
meetings of the Auihoriiy, !he procedure io be/oiiowed a1
such nleeiings, !he rransoction o f business a! !he meefings
and !he regisier 10 be maintained by !he Aurhorily. The
remaining two iopics specged in Clauses (e) and fl of
Section 3612) are direc~ly referable !o Section
!!(!)lb)(viii) and !!(lj(c). These are substan~ivefunc!ions
o/ihe Aulhoriiy. However, there is noihing in the language
o f Seciion 3612) from which if can be inferred ihai ihe
provisions conrained therein conrroi !he exercise o f p o w e r
b.v !he Au!horiry under Section 36/!) or iha!Section 3632)
res!iic!s !he scope o/Sec!ion 36/11,

99. Be/ore parling wiih !his aspec! o j !he maller, we may

norice Sec~ions33 and 37. A reading of !he plain language
o f SecIion 33 makes it clear !ha! !he Aurhorip can, by
general or special order, delegale 10 any member or oflcer
ofrhe Aurhoriry or any oiher person such o j i l s powers and
jinc!ions under !he Ac! excepi !he power to se!!le dispures
under Chapier IV or make regulaiions under Seciion 36.
This means ihat \he power io make regulaiions under
S e c ~ i o n 36 is non-delegable. The reason for excluding
Seciion 3 6 f r o m ihe purview o f Seciion 33 is simple. The
power under Seclion 36 is legisla~ive as opposed !o
adminisirotive. By virtue o f Section 37, the regulaiions
made under !he Act are placed on par wi!h !he rules which
 can be jromed by rhe Cenlral Government under Section
35 and being in [he n a ~ u r eqisubordina~elegisla~ions,the
rules and regltlalions have lo be laid bejore both the
Houses ojParliarne~~l i l modi;ij, [he same.
which can a i ~ n ~or
Thus, the reguiations framed by the Authority can be made
inefleclive or modified by Parlianlen! and by no other
bod/

/ D O . In view o j (he above discussion and !he propositions laid

down in rhe judgmenrs re/erred to in the preceding
paragraphs, we hold (hat rhe power vesred in [he Authority
under Seciion 3631) to make regularions is wide and
pervusive. The exercise o/this power is only subject ro [he
provisions ojP:he Act and rhe Ruies jramed under Section
35 ;hereof There is no ulher lbni[ation 011 (he exercise of
power by [he Auliioriiy under S e c ~ i o n36(1), It is KO/
cot~irolledor liniiied by Seciion 36(2) or Seclions 11, 12
and 13."

IMPUGNED DIRECTION IK VIOLATION OF OBJECTS OF THE

TRAl ACT

V. That the present impugned direction fails to carry out the objects of
TRAl Act, whic!~is provided in the preamble of the Act, i.e. "an act to

provide for the establishment of the Teleco~nRegulatory Authority of

India and the Teleco!n Disputes Setrlement and Appellate Tribunal to

regulate the tele:ommunication services, adjudicate disputes, dispose of

appeals and io proreci [he i.vlrresrs ofservice providers and consumers of

!he !eleco~nsec~or,!o promore and ensure arderiy growth o j teieco~n

sector and /or n7atter connected therewith or incidentai thereto.". By

virtue of the ilrpugnsd direction, TRAl has failed toLdisplay as to how

the prohibition of placement o f the registered TV channel on the landing

channel 1s against the orderly growih o f the sector, especially (i) that

consumer at the rime of s\vitciiing on the channel has pre-decided as to

) orderly grorvth, TRAI ought to

the content he desires to ,watch; ( ~ i for

have loolted at recomlnendlng or clianging !lie television rating system,

prior to issuance of the Impugned Cirection; (iii) failed to display as to

how such practice is discrirninatory in nature andlor anti-consumer; (iv)

placeinenr as a concept exists in the industry and substantially all the

 broadcasters execute placementicarriage agreements to place their

channels at better frequencies and pacltages, which is outside the

purview of TRAI's Regulations and (v) the landing channel service is

offered by the distribution platform for better viewing experience of the

consumer and thus, has nothing to do with the inter-connectivity between

two service providers

W. There is no evidence to sho\v that by placing the channel on landing page

is has its i l l effects on the TRPs or that it jeopardizes the accuracy and

the credibility of Tv rating system In fact, the services of placement are

most consumer friendly as the DPO should be encouraged to offer

different productsichannels on its landing page to [maintain viewer's

interest and offer variety to the consumer. In the absence of any

guideline or regulation pertaining to the landing page, the broadcasters

and DPOs cannot be lnade a scapegoat by restricting them from

managing their network which by no stretch of imagination, can be said

to be violative o f any extant Regulations. The impugned direction is

. -
further arbitrary on the ground that the onus of complying with the

Impugned Direction has been put on the broadcasters. T h e placement of

a channel on landing page further gives rise to innovation and the

impugned direction will disable technically enabled service which will

not result in orderly growth.

-
-.

X. TRAI is aware that the placing of a channel is a prerogative of the MSO,

and M S O is free to agree to place any channel at any LCN so long as the
same appears as part of the same genre.

Y . TRAI's stand would lead to legal uncertainty creating an unhealthy

envirpnlnent for business to propagate and result in dis-orderly growth.

TRAl has never ever addressed any issues pertaining to T V ratings or

deficienciesianainolies of the same, and thus the Impugned Direction has

 I
been issued arbitrarily. T.UI is thus overreaching its powers given under

the TRAI ACL

THE D I R E C T I O N HAS NO CO-RELATION W I T H T H E INTER-

CONNECTIVITY AS PROVIDED IN SECTION ll(l)(b) O F T H E ACT
~ N D H E N C FAILED
E TO FOLLOW THE DUE PROCESS O F LAW

Z. BECAUSE due process of la\\, has not been followed by the respondent

while issuing the Impugned Directions. At the foremost, TRAI ought to

have issued a consultation paper in this regard, and only thereafter, after

consulting all the stakeholders 7assed a Regulation or a Tariff Order,

which partaltes the nature o f a law and enforce the same if needed.

A A BECAUSE the linpugned Direction would also tantalnount to varying

the terms of the coEtract inutually negotiated and agreed between parties,

which in light d f a catena of judg~sents~vouldamount to doing an act

indirectly, that could not be done directly.

BB. BECAUSE the power of the TRAI under Section 11 of the TR4I Act

conte~nplatesonly the power of the authority to determine the terms and

conditions of inter-connectivity between the service providers. Section

. -
1 1 contemplates the function of the T U I , one of which is to fix the

terms and conditions of inter-conneativity between the service providers.

While the issue of inter connectivity is Iirnited only to the provisioning of

services by one service provider to. another by way of subscription

agreement, any other arrangement between such set iif service providers

is not covered by the TRAI Act and any further arrangement between the

service providers cannot be curbed by issuance of any direction like the

present impugned direction. I n order to effectively i ~ n p l e ~ n e nthe

t intent

of Section I 1 of the TRAI Acl, the functions O F the authority, first, inust

be discharged and only thereafter enforced.

CC. The Teleco~nlnunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services

Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulatiocs, 2017 dated

 03.03.2017 and notified by TRAi or1 03.07.2016, contemplate that i t

shall be obligatory on the part of the distributors to place channels in the

electronic progarnine guide (EPG)in such a way that the tv channels of

same genre are placed together consecutively and one channels shall

appear a! orie place only. Hence, by placing the TV channel on l a n d ~ n g

page, which does not fall within any panicular genre, does not violate the

said provision. Ir: fact the said phrase has nor been defined anywhere in

the Regulations.

DD. Even assuming for the sake of arguments tliat Section 13 of the TR4I

Act car: bc invoked for the pl.lrpsses for discharge of the function

not%ithstanding the ground above, even then the issue that is b e ~ n g

raised by TRAl and the direct~onwhich has been issued has no co-

relation with inter-connectivity of channels between ;wo service

providers, in fact, the service of placing channel is offered by the DPO to

better its in:erface with the ~ ~ n s i i i ~ ~ e r s l s u b s i r i bIte r senhances

. the

viewing experience of the subscribers. Consumers not being a Service

provider in terms of the TRAI Act, the inanner or ierlns of offering of the

service by DPO cannot be brought within the arnbit of TRAI Act by way

of the Inipugned Direction and cannot be considered as an

interconnectior.. The placement of 2 channel on a particular LCN is a

function of mutual agreement between the parties=-in respect of the

placement of the channel and has nothing to do with inter-connectivity or

subscription of' the channel to betterlenhance the experience of the

consu~ner.While the subscription agreements [nay be regulated by TRAI

as per the Regulations, the placement agreements or any other agreement

is not regulated neither does TRAl rnakes an assertion that the same is

regulated. Thbs, the issue of place~nentbeing out of the p ~ ~ r v i eof

w the

regulations and T U I . It is not correct for the Respondent to regulate the

 . ,
Placeinent and other fonns of agreements, especially when the

interconnection of the channel has been provided under the subscription

agreement and not under the Placement Agreements

EE. Also, i t must be kept in mind that the consumer even before the TV is

switched on has decided tlie content he wants to watch and hence to say

that the placement of [he charinel in land~ngspace is discri~ninaLoryis

wrong, in fact, TRAI ought to hai,e regulaied the rating system and with

a view to indirec~ly place guidelines for r a ~ i n g TV channels, the

impugned direction has been passed

FF. BECAUSE even assuming for the sake of arguments that Scctioli 13 of
fir?,
I!::, -j'
the TRAI Act can be invoked for the purposes o i discharge of the

functiori notwithstanding the powers exercised under Section I 1 of T R 4 1

Act, eke11 then the issue that ic being raised by TRAI and the direction

which has been issued has no co-relation with inter-connectivity of

channels between two service providers,

GG. BECAUSE tile consumer choice has adequately been addressed and

taksn care of in the Interconnect Regulations, 201 7 . Relevant paras from

the Explanatory ~ne~noranduin

appended to the 1ntercotine:t Regulations,

2017 are reproduced herein below for tlie sake of brevity:-

"Placement
56 In nddressab[e syslons, ihe rechnoiog); provides for an
Elecrroiiic Prograiri Guide (EPGj wherein the channels being
carried on a DPO's nehuork can be arranged in a simple and
easy to understand manner so iliar rhe subscriber can easily
go ihrough this guide and seieci ihe channel of choice instead
of yipping ihrough ail the channels. In the draJ
Inferconneciion Regulalions, 2316. the DPOr were mandated
to 1i:l all rhe channel? avaiiable on ihe plaGgrm in the EPG,
in s ~ i c ha manner i h a ~a consun7er can easily selecr the
channe! o,f its choice. The genre and icnguage wise 1is:ing o f
TI' channels in :he EPG was proposed in :he draJ
Interconnection Regulations, 2016 io ensure placenzenl o/ a
channel among similar channels.
 1 - ~

Furiher, in rhe d r a j , ir was proposed thai the broadcasrer

cannot piit any pre-condition for providing signals to [he
DPOs lo place his channels ai a parricular position in the
EPG or lo assign a pariicular number lo his channel as such
s~ipulationmay not be prac[icallypossible lo implemenr. For
example, i/ any nvo broadcas~ersinsist for same posirion in
ihe EPG as a pre-condition be/ore providing signals oilheir
TV cl.ianize1s then it is not practicaliy possible /or a DPO lo
meet theprc-condiiion.

57, i n response, mosr of the broadcasiers opined thar [he

placenzeni of channels and place in en^ fee should be broughl
under [he arnbir of regulatory jramework. As per [hem, non
reguialed placemeni and markelingjee makes the model non-
lransparenl and creale a back door enlry b y allowing
negoiialed agreemenls between DPOs and broadcasrers for
LCN

98. In ihese regularions the broadcasrers have been given a

complele fieedojn ro declare rhe genre oftheir channels and
in rerms o j i h e regularions, ir has been mandated thai a DPO
shall place rhe channels in rhe EPG under ihe respective
genres so declared by rhe broadcasrers. Furrher it has also
been mandared thar DPOs shall place rhe channels of rhe
same genre in such a manner thar all TV channels of same
langiiage within [he same genre shall appear rogerher
conseculiveiy in !he EPG. In order lo curb [he practice to
frequenrly change LCN number, it has been mandated rhar
. . LCN number once ailocared will no1 be changed for durarion
of at leasr one year, Therefore, the placemenls of channels
have been adequately regulared and necessary prorection has
been granred ro the broadcasrer so rhar !heir channels are not
placed ar any disadvanrageous position in the EPG. Hence as
such (here is no requireinen[jbr a broadcasler joi asking for
a spec$c posiiion in the EPG.

99, i n !he new regularory frameworlc, emphusis has been

inc~eased01.1 consumer choice. Therefore, when consumers
wiil choose only selected channeis which they a c ~ u a l i y w a n ro
i
view, the imporrance of placemenr of channel reduces
drasiically. Furlher, in !he regularory framework, [he
carriage and placemen[ i7ave been clearly dislinguished The
carriage fee as per demand of (he stakeholders has been
regulared and in~rsrcarry provisions would ensure !he access
io (he distribulion networks in non-discriminatory manner.
Eat-liei, rhese hvo kinds of fees were clubbed logelher by
service providers and

nailpaynzenr ofcombinedjee could have denied a channel (he

access lo rhe nen+'ork, Now the sanze will nor be possible.
 Maizdatlng provision for discouni within ceiling o/ l J % for
allocalion o,f plucernenl or LCN 0.7 some percentcge o,f
c1m111eiprice i;!4RP) rmy noi serve [he purpose as if %ill
creaie c i ~ o n1e~:elp!ayi/zgJeld/br pay clzai~izelsvis-a-vis FTA
channeis as in case o,fFTA c11ari.iels [he A4RP is nil.
However, in case, a Srocdcasier siili wishes lo place its
chanile! ai n particular posrtion or a spec$c number assigned
io its charinel, subjecl to [he provisions of these reguialions,
the broadcasier may offer discounl within !he prescribed
frume~corkor poy /he m u ~ u a l i ;agreed
~~ fee, ufier iigning [he
interconnection agreemeni, lo a disiriburor for piacing [he
channel. 11is itnportan: to noie here [ha! such interconnection
agreeinenis, signedJor piacen?eni of channels, shall also be
i10,7-discrii~1ii7ciory. Such agreemenis, i/ ai7y, shall be
ap7eiided a:iii~[he main ii~ierco~~ncction
agreeiileni and wou!d
be-filed with the Authority as per [he rc,p/aiions iloiiJied by
the Aulhoriry ,+om time io iime, li will ensure the
trcnspcrency. "

HH. BECAUSE the issue of placeinent is outside the purview of the

Regulations and lRA1 Act. The Respondent seeks to bring within its

purview of regulation the placeinent and/or marketing of channels which

is totally determined on the basis of inarltet forces of deinand and supply.

11. BECAUSE the Impugned Direcl~on is also conrrary to T R 4 l ' s

undersranding in the past :hat place~nenlao,re:~nenls are no( witliin the

purview of the Regulations. Tllis can be inade clear froin a bare perusal

of the provisions pertaining to the issue of placement as dealt under the

Regulations of2012 and 2017, whicli are noted as below:

I I 1
-

Regulation Relevant Provision

1
i
Dated
I) CI. 2(n) 'c;lrriage fee" means any fee paid by a broadcasier to a
__1
1
I distributor of T\l channels, for carriage of the channels or bouquets
I of channels of' that broadcaster on the distribution platform owned
'Ior operated by such distributor of 1.1;channels, without specifying I
/ the placeinent of various c!ia~ii~rls
chaiiileli of other broadcasters.
of thc broadcaster vir-8-vic

CI. Z ( v ) " p l a c e m e ~ ~fee"

t ineansany fee paid by a broadcaster to a
30.04.2012 distributor of TV channels, for placeinent of the channels of such
(principal broadcasrer vis-a-vis channels of other broadcasters on the
DAS distribution platform owned or operated by suck distributor of TV
Regulation)
CI. 3(6) If a broadcaster before providing signals to a rnulti system]
 I
operator insist for place~nentof its channel in a particulars lot as 2
pre-condition for providing signals, such pre-condition shall alnoun
to imposition of unreasonable terms.
CI. 3(11) If a ~nultisystem operator before providing access to it:
networlc LO a hroadcaster insist on place~nentof the channel of suck
broadcaster in a particular slot or bouquet, such precondition shal
amount to i~npositionof unreasonable terms.
CI. 9 (Reporting Requirement): Every broadcaster shall furnist
the deta~lsof carriage fee paid by him to the multi-system operat01
along with the infor~natio~l furnished by h i ~ n under the Register o
Interconnect Agreements (BroadcasLing and Cable Services:
Regulation, 2004 (15 of 2004), as amended from time to time. Sucl-
information henceforth shall a!so include details of carriage fee paic
to the ~nultisyste~noperator by the broadcaster.
14.05.2012 CI. 3(11A) No ~nulti system oDerator shall demand from e
(Firs1 broadcaster any placement.fees. ( ~ i i sClause was inserted by Firxi
4mendmen1 Anyen r l n ~ o ~ t )
o Principal
DAS
Pegulation)
CL. 3(11A) was omitted pursuant to Hon'ble Tribunal's Judg~nenr
dated 19.10.20 12, which set-aside tile afore~nentionedprovision on
the ground that since no restric~ionis placed on DTH for placement,
-

similarly no restriction w.r.1, placement should be placed on MSO's.

-
Pursuant to Hon'ble Tribunal's Judgment dated 19.10.2012, T R A ~
co~nrnenced Consultation Process wherein the issue was raised
whether there is a need for regulating the place~nentfees in all the
Digital Addressable System, if so, how i t should be regulated..
Accordingly, Stake Holders have given their response on the
aforesaid issue and majority of thein stated that Placement should be
left to ~narket forces. (Please refer to paras 26-29 of the
20.09.2D13 Explanatory Men~oranduni).
(Second
4mendment After the Consultation Process TRAI was of the following view -
o Principal Para 30 of Explanatory Memorandum: The issue has been
DAS analysed. In DAS, the technolog)' provides for an EPG wherein the
Pegulalion) channels being carried on an h4SO's network can be arranged in a
jimpie, easy to understand, manner so that the subscriber can easily
go through this guide and select the channel of his clloice instead of
flipping through all the channels. The genre-wise display of
zhannels in the EPG, where all the channels of a particular genre are
listed under relevant genre, has been ~ilandatedthrough regulations.
Moreover, in digitai systems. signal quality of the channels is
independent of the place~nent of the channei. Further, the
Interconnection Regulation already has a provision [sub-regulation
3 (1 I)] that if an MSO, before providing access to its net~vorlc,
insists on placement of the channei in a particular slot or bouquet,
juch precondition alnounts to ilnposition of unreasonable terms.
r h u s , adequate provisions already exist in the regulations.
4ccordingly, sub-regulation 11A of regulation 3 of the
nterconnection regulation has been deleted.
3efore coming out with the Third Amendment to the Principal
14.09.2006 4nalogue Regulations, TRAI has commenced Consultation Process.
(Third n the said Consultation Process, wherein two issues arose which
lmendmen! ire as under -
 ,
i -
17-5 .-
--.,,

to Principal Wherher carriage fees on cable networks should be

Analogue regulated? If so, on what basis should this be done and how
Reguia~ions) should carriage charges be calcula~ed?
Whar shouid be the ~nechanis~n for ensuring that the ceiling
for carriage charge is not exceeded?

I I
All the Stalte Holders presented their views and ~najoritywere of
the opinion that the carriage and placement fees should be left t o ,
inarltet forces on the ground that broadcasters pay placeinent and
carriage fee from their advertisement pie.
17.03.2009 CI. 2(ia) "carriage fee" lneans any fee paid by a broadcaster to a
(Fifth distributor of TV channels, for carriage of the channels or
Amendment bouquets of channeis of that broadcaster on the distribution
f o Principal platform owned or operated by such distributor of TV channels,
Analogue without specifying the piacelnent of various channels of the
Regularions) broadcaster vis-a-vis channels of other broadcasters.
CI. Z(rnc)"placernent fee" means any fee paid by a broadcaster to
a distributor of TV channels, for placement of the channels of such
broadcaster vis-a-vis channels of other broadcasters on the
1
distribution platform owned or operated by such distributor of TV

Explanatior~ ? to CI 3(2). The stipulation of '"placement

frequent!," or "package/ tier" bj' rhe broadcaster fro~nwhom the
signals have been sought by a distributor of TV channels, as a
"pre-condition" for rnaking available signals of the requested
channel(s) sliall also amount to imposition of unreasonable
terms."
TRAI while undergoing the Consuitation Process for t h e ~ i f t r
Amendment has stated that "The Authority has decided that no
regulation w . r . t , carriage fee is required at this stage for the
following reasons:-
* Pay~nentofCarriage/Place~nentiTechnicalFeebyabroadcasterisin
timatelylinked
wi~htlieperceivedbenetitthatthebroadcastenvouldenjoybywayof
increased advertising revenue, This linltage is )manifested by
higher le\,els of Carriage Fee in TAM cities (cities where the
rating agencies have ~nstalledtheir ~neteringdevices in sainple
households). Therefore, Regulation of Carriage Fee cannot be
done in isolation without regulating the advertising revenue.
[Pore 34(b) o f Expianotory ibletnorandutn/_
I TRAI, 1v.r.t placelnent fees in the Explanatory Melnorandu~n
has stated that "The 'placement fee 'is paid by the
broadcasters to the distributors of TV channels for placing
their channel(s) at the desired frequency/tier/package for
inaxilnizing viewership and revenue of their channel(s). The
placement.fee is different from "carriage fee" and the said

! aspect has been explicitly recognized by the Authority by

defining these two terrns separately in the definition clause.
The amendment seelts to address the issue of carriage fee only
and not the place~nentfee, whir!i is governed by the market
forces and ~nutualnegotiations between the broadcaster(s) and
distributor(s) of TV channel." [Pora 36 o f t h e Expianatorj~
Mettiora~ldurn].
Interconnect Clilr~se Z(n1) "carriage fee" lneans any fee payable by a
Regulations, broadcasrer to a distributor of television channels only for the
 purpose of carrying its channels tlirougli the distributor's network,
without, specifying the placement of such channels onto a specific

4
position in the elecrronic progra~nlneguide orl seeking assignment
of a particular number to such channels;
n the new 1,egulatory fra~neworlc,emphasis lias been increased on
consumer choice. Therefore, when consumers will choose only
selected channels which they actually want to view, the importance
of placement of channel reduces drastically. Further, in the
regulatory frame~vork,the carriage and placement have been clearly
distinguished. The carriage fee as per demand of the stakeholders
has been regulated and must carry provisions would ensure the
access to the distriburion nerworks in non-discriminatory manner.
Earlier, these two ltinds o f fees were clubbed together by s e n ~ i c e
providers and non payment o f combined fee could have denied a
! channel the access to tlie networlc. NOW the same will not be

possible. Mandating provision for discount within ceiling of 15%

for allocation of place~nentor LCN as some percentage of channel
price (MW)may not serve the purpose as it will create a non level
playing field fol- pay clhannels vis-a-vis FTA channels as in case of
FTA clianneis the MRP is nil. liowever, in case, a broadcaster still
wishes to place its cliaiinel at a particular position or a specific
number assigned to its channel, s u b j e c ~to the provisions of these
regulations, the broadcaster may offer discount within the
prescribed framework or pay the mu:ually agreed fee, after signing
rhe interconnection agreement, to a distributor for placing the
channel. It is imporrant to note here that such interconnection
agreements, signed for placement of channels, shall also be non-
discriminatory. Such agreements, if any, shall be,appended with the
lniain interconnection agreement and ivould be filed with the
Authority as per the regulations notified by rhe Authority froin time
to time, I t will ensure the transparent)!, [Para 99 o f the
Expla/lalorj~Menzoru~~drr/i~].

JJ. BECAUSE TRAI has not also shared any evidence or conducted any

study in so far as the allegations levelled against the Appellant and other

broadcasters are baseless and based (merely on frivolous cornpiaints made

-.

with ulterior inotives against the Appe!lant.

KK. BECAUSE TRAI ought to have conducted due diligence before issuing

'the impugned direction and other similar cotninunications in order to

verify the authenticity of tlie c o ~ n p a i n t s ,which are devoid of material

facts

LL. BECAUSE TRAI lias issued the Impugned Direction in colourable

exercise o i power.
MM.There )F+,
is no evidence to show that the putting of the channel on landing

page is anti- consumer or otherwise receives a better reading or rating.

NN.TRAI has proceeded to issue the Impugned Direction on pre conceived

notion and that is the reason that there is no deviation in its

understanding, despite detailed reasoning provided by various

stakeholders that issue of landing page need not be deliberated and

should be left for the parties to act as' per their business understanding

and c o ~ n ~ n e r c i ainterest.
l The consumer choice does not get affected in

any manner whatsoever.

00. BECAUSE TRAI failed to examine the aspect that the TRPs do not

affect the consulner choice, it is the consulner choice that ~naltesthe

TRP If a consulner wants to watch a channel or programme, he will

directly go that particular channel and would never wait on the landing

page. TRP ratings are ~nerelya lneasure of consulner preferences and not

the basis of consumer preferences. I t is lneant for the advertisers and lhas

nothing to do with the subscribers.

PP: If at all the premise of the Impugned Direction is taken to be correct,

then it needs thorough examination that TRPs are not available in the

public domain enabling the consumers to ~naltean informed choice.

QQ. Placing a channel on tile landing page is not the only way in which

viewership is attracted. A product that is advertissd extensively gets

inore sale. However, this cannot be assu~nedas a distortion of consulner

choice, but indeed a lneans for the advertisers to bring their products to

the consumers by lneans of displaying the product available to the

consumer. Landing page is merely a medium to advertise the content to

the consumers with the option to flip or not to flip the channel.
RR. I f a channel is being placed on landing page and a c o n s t h e r chooses to

stay on rhe landing page itself then ir cannot be seen as a distortion of

consumer choice, but an expression of consumer choice.

In fact TR4I itself has issued a fresh Consultation paper dated

03.12.2018 titled titled "Review of Television Audience Measurement

and Ratings in India", which clearly stipulate that there is a need for a

credible, transparent and representative television audience measurement

system and continuance with an inadequate television rating system will

hamper tile growth of TV industry as financial decisions, production of

programnies and its scheduling are largely influenced by television

ratings. I t is further clear from the consultation paper that the viewing is

recorded only after the channel is viewed f'or 30 seconds or Inore in a

clock minute. Hence, the landing page cannot impact the TRY at all, as

all consumers change channels within 7 seconds as ~nentionedby one

stakeholder iiamely India TV and 43 seconds slated by Odisha

Television. Tating average of the same also, i t would come to around 25

seconds. Hence, admittedly even as per TRAI, T R P does not get

affected by placing the channels on Landing page as alleged.

SS. If every advertisinglmarketing opportunity is brought within the

regulated scheme, then the interests of the stateholders get affected, and

ultin~atelyleading to extinction of their fundamental ;ghts.

'T. BECAUSE the Impugned Direction is also factually incorrect as the

LCN for rhe channel s o placed on the landing page is the same as the

LCN in the respective genre of the said channel on the EPG. The

contentionslallegation of the Authorit), is sans any material proof that the

broadcasters are placing the same channel on two LCN of different

genres si~nultaneouslyor on single landing channel, however not on its

genre.
 distribution platforln owner, and distribution platforrn owner is free to

agree to place any channel at any LCN so long as the same appears as

part of the same genre. .Any placement of channel at any LCN which

does not form part of any of the declared genre, can in no inanner

whatsoever be called to be anti-Regulation.

VV. If placing a channel on the Anding page is wrong, then placing one

channel over the other i n the same genre is also wrong. Taltirlg that

concept into considera:ion, any p:ace~nentagreeinenl is tvrong and

discri~ninatory. In the Interconnect Regulat~ons, 2017 TRAI has

perinitred ths broadcasters to give discounts on the basis of the

placement of channel on any specified position in the EPG or assigning a

particular channel number. Thus TRAI recognises that it is the

prerogative of the broadcasters and the distributors to place the channels

as per their business undersranding and commercial interests.

WW.BECAUSE there is no polic!, or gaideline in place with respect to the

landing page and the DPOs cannot be obligated to inanage their network

as per some arbitrary direction of the authority which does not have any

sanction of law.

THE IMPUGNED DIRECTION IS VIOLATIVE O F ARTICLE 19(l)(gj

AND ARTICLE 14 O F THE CONSTITUTION O F INDIA, 1950
-
XX. BECAUSE by way of the I~npugnedDirection, TrWI has exceeded its

jurisdiction and has also infringed the Fundamental Rights of the

stakeholders to conductlcarry on their occupation, trade or business,

guaranteed under Article 19il)(g) of the Constitution of India, I950 by

prescribing liinitationslconditions on the inanner in which they carry on

their business, vvhich do not :^orin a pan of the Regulation.

 law which plnccs reasonable restrictions in the public interest, however,

T U I seeks to regulate and curtail the Appellants' right to do business in

a inalafide, arbitrary and non-transparent inanner by issue of the

impugned direction. By no stretch of imagination, the issuance of the

impugned direction can be treated as a law under Article 13 of the

Constitution of India. Hence. TRAI i a s curtailed the Appellant's right to ,

do business guaranteed under Article ( I ( of the Constitution of

India, without following the due process of law as the Appeliant is being

prohibited froin executing arrangements with the distributors with

respect to the placement and inarket:ng of its channels.

ZZ.If placing a channel on the landing page is wrong, then placing one

channel over tile other in the same genre is also wrong. Talting that

concept into consideratio~l. any placenient agreement is wrong and

discriminatory. Hence, merely to single out by prohibiting the placement

of chanilels oil landing paze is violative of Article 14 of t;he Constitution

. .
of lndia.

C O L O R A B L E EXERCISE OF P O W E R

AAA. BECAUSE Section I? of TRAl Act has not been exercised bonafide

and for the end design.

BBB. BECAUSE T M I in colorable exercise of its pouters, is influenced in

its exercise by considerations outside those for pro~notionof which the

power is vested.

CCC. BECAUSE TRAI has issued a direction, which amounts to colourabie

exercise of power, in an arbitrary and inalafide manner, and hence.

violative of Article 14 of the Constitution o f India. No regulatory

governmer,t authority can exercise its powers in an arbitrary manner.

 DDD BECAUSE TRAI has failed to appreciate thar the true'and correct

~meaningof law lias to be given lo a pa:ticular- stature. The Autl7ority b y

way of rule malting pox:.er conferred upon i t , cannot add words or

impose conditions on tlie existing regulations, which conditions d c nct

exist in tlie regulations.

EEEBECAUSE the Regulations is a law within tlie meaning of Article i 3 of

the Constiturio:~ of India, and no lzw can be introduced, amended,

modified andlor altered \~:ithout following the due process o f law

provided in tlie Acl in this case !he TRAI Act.

FFF. BECAUSE the Respondent has also failed to appreciate the general

principle of law and as laid down in a catena o f judgments that if any

power does not Cow lrom any statuteiregulation, then the autilority by

framing rules cannor lrame rcgulations that would not be in accordance

with the statutory provisions nor would it be for tlie purpose o'f carrying

out the provisions of the Act.

GGG. TRAI should not be allowed to regulate placement, which it, on its
. -
own shoaling has never regulated and does not intend to regulate. This is

again 2 colourable exercise of power. In fact, tlie fallacy in issuing the

impugned direction lies in the fact that TRAI should have rather guided

itself by the question as to whether guidelines o f the television rating

.
agency needs amendment or not.

HHH. That t!le i r n ~ ~ g n edirection

d is absolutely unreasonable and arbitrary

in nature I t is stated that :lie impugned directions grossly violates Article

13 of the Ccnstitution of india and hence, ought to be set aside.

111. Any other ground with the psrtnission of this Hon'ble Tribunal.

9. The Appeilant craves leave from this Hon'ble Tribunal to raise any other

grounds, in addition to the foregoing, at (he tiine of hearing of the present

Appeal.
 10. The Appellant states [hat the impugned D~rectionwas issuedon 03.12.2018

and hence the prtsent appeal 1s ivithin limitation in 1er:ns of Sub-section (3) of

Section 14A of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997

1 I . That in the above circumstances_ the Appellant is filing the present appeal

bonafide and having no other efficacious remedy but to approach this Hon'ble

Tribunal.

!. I , & ,,, 12. That the appellant further declares that tile). have not filed arry other
.... t:. :;
application1,appeal ir this Hon'ble Tribunal or in any other court against the

Respondent herein in relat~onto and/or arising cut of the subject matter sought

to be adjudicated i n the present appeal

PRAYER

In view of the facts and circuinstaiices set forth above, the Appellant most

respectful'ly prays that this Hon'ble Court )nay graciously be pleased to:-

INTERIM PRAYER

a) Stay the operation of the direction dated 03.17.2015 purportedly issued in

.. ..
', exercise of Section I3 of the T R 4 I Act, 1497 read with Sec:ion I I (l)(b)(ii)
i,: :
,$?:,,.,./
/

.L. of the TRAI Act. I997 to the Appellant, who is broadcaster of pay channels;.

(b) Pass such 0 t h order or direction as the court ma) deem fit in the interest of

justice, I t is prayed accordingly.

F I K A I , PRAYER

a) Pass an orde: quashing and setting aside the Direction dated 03.12.2018

purportedly issued in extrcise of Sectio~: 13 of the TRAI Act, 1997 read u~itli

Section I l(l)jb)(ii) of the TR41 Act, 1997 to the Appellant; andlor

 b) Pass such other order or direction as the court may deem fit in the interest of

justice. It is prayed accordingly.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE APPELLANT IS DUTY BOUPT AND

SHALL EVER PRAY

r ;
, .',
. ....
.<'."
($9

THROUGH

Advocates for the Appellant

C/o Tandon & Co.
X-3, Green Park Main,
New Delhi- 1100 16
(J:',; Ph: 01 1 26520041-42
,.
*..>!?
. New Delhi
,fl,
, ,'
,(.,,('.
-. Dated: - )4.13.]0
VERIFICATION

I, Shilpa Bhadoria. Dlo of DPS Bhador~a,aged about 35 years, working as the

Authorized Representative of the Appellant Company No. 1, having its office at 61h
Floor, Equinox Business Park, Tower 1, , Off. BKC, Ambedkar Nagar, Kurla
(west), Mumbai - 400070, presently at New Delhi, do hereby verify that the
contents of Para Nos. J-1$ of the aforesa~dAppeal are true and correct upon
records maintained by the Appellant Company in its ordinary and usual course of
business and nothing mater~alhas been concealed thereof.
VERIFICATION
185
I, Sanjay K. Agarwal, Son of Late Shri Shyarn Lal, aged about 48 years,
Representative of the Appellant Company No. 2, having its office at 6" Floor,
Equinox Business Park, Tower I , Off. BKC, Ambedkar Nagar, Kurla (West),
Mumbai - 400070, presently at New Delhi, do hereby verify that the contents of
Para Nos. I-a of the aforesaid Appeal are true and correct upon records
maintained by the Appellant Company in its ordinary and usual course of business
and nothing material has been concealed thereof.
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1.4 NO. ----------- /2019
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2019

IN THE MATTER OF:

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India . . . Appellant/

Applicant

-Versus-

Bennett Coleman & CO.LJCI? 64 fl0-6. c4e , ... Respondents

APPLICATION FOR STAY

To
The ~ o n ' b f eChief Justice of India
And the Hon'ble Compamon Justices of
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India

The humble Appeal of

the Appellant above named

I-, MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

I '

(1) The Appellant/Applicant has filed the accompanying

. -
Appeal under Section 18 of the Telecom Regulatory

Authority of India Act, 1997 against final Common Order

dated 29.05.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Telecom

Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribuna1,;New Delhi in

Broadcasting Appeal No. 2 of 2018, Broadcasting Appeal

No. 4 of 2018 & Broadcasting Appeal No. 1 of 2019,

wherein the Hon'ble TDSAT was pleased to allow the said

Appeals and set aside the direction dated 03.12.2018

issued by the Appellant Authority, w h l e holding the

same as beyond the provisions of the Telecom Regulatory

 '.
Authority of India Act, 1997 which empower the
/87
Appellant Authority to issue directions.

(2) That the facts and circumstances giving rise to and the

submissions and contentions in support of this

Application for stay are fully set out in the Appeal and,

for the sake of brevit), the Appellant craves leave of thls

Hon'ble Court to refer to and rely upon the said facts and

circun~stancesand subnlissioils and contentions, as if

they are set out herein in extenso.

(3) The Applicant is advised and verily believes that it has a

good case in its Appeal filed before this Hon'ble Court

and the Appellant is likely to succeed. There is a clear

prii-na facie case in favour of the Appellant.

(4) If the operation and effect of the Impugiled Judgement is

. -
not stayed, it is submitted that it shall have far reaching

repercussioils, and usher in discriminatory practices.

(5) The Appellant humbly subinits that the interests of

-
..

justice and balance of convenience require that the

interim reliefs prayed hereunder be granted. The

,Appellant further humbly submits that the granting of

reliefs prayed hereunder would not prejudice the

Responclents in any inanner whereas the refusal thereof

~voulclrclnder the Appellant's Appeal infructuous.

 PRAYER

In the premises, the Appellant most humbly prays Your

Lordships to be graciously pleased to pass the following

Orders: -

a. To stay the operation and effect of the final

Common Order dated 29.05.2019 passed by the
Hon'ble Telecoin Disputes Settlement & Appellate
Tribunal, New Delhi in Broadcasting Appeal No. 2 of
2018, Broadcasting Appeal No. 4 of 2018 &
Broadcasting Appeal No. 1 of 2019;

b. To pass such further and other Orders as this

Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper.

(SANJAY KAPUR)
Advocate for the Appellant/
Applicant

-.-
r
Filed on: 11.07.2019
 '.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 9
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
IA NO. ----------- /2019
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2019

IN THE MATTER OF:

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ... Appellant/

Applicant

Bennett Coleman & a4 A hd. C

'&, .&$? k - ... Respondents

APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING

CERTIFIED COPY OF IMPUGNED FINAL COMMON ORDER
DATED 29.05.2019

To,
The Hon'ble Chief Justice of India
And the Hon'ble Companion Justices of
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
The humble petition of the
Petitioner abovenamed

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

(1) The Appellant/Applicant has filed the accompanling

Appeal under Section 18 of the Telecom Regulatory

-
Authority of India Act, 1997 against final Coinmon Order

dated 29.05.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Telecom

Disputes Settlement 9. Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in

B:oaclcasting Appeal No. 2 of 2018, Broadcasting Appeal

No. 1 of 2018 & Broadcasting Appeal No. 1 of 2019,

wherein the Hon'ble TDSAT was pleased to allow the said

Appeals and set aside the direction dated 03.12.2018

 issued by the Appellant Authority, while holding 'the

same as beyond the proliisions of the Telecom Regulatory

Authority of India Act, 1997 which empower the

Appellant Authority to issue directions.

(2) That under the Rule of t h s Hon'ble Court the Petitioner

, .
:
/ ,, is required to file certified copy of the impugned final

coinnlon order dated 29.05.2019 along with the Civil

Appeal.

(3) That on behalf of the Appellant the certified copy of the

impugned final common order dated 29.05.2019 has

been applied but the same have not been received

inasmuch as the same are not yet ready.

(4) That the Appellant is seeking urgent ex-parte interirn

orders in the above Civil Appeal. It is therefore, necessary

to move this Hon'ble Court, without waiting for the

certified copy. The Appellant undertakes to file the

certified copy of the impugned final common order, in

this I-Ion'ble Court, as and when received.

-..
PRAYER

In the premises, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court

be pleased to grant exemption from filing certified copies

of the in~pugiledorders:

(a) dated 29.05.2019 passed by :he Hon'ble Telecom

Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal, New

 Delhi in 13roadcasting Appeal No. 2 of 2018.

Broadcasting Appeal No. 4 of 2018 & Broadcasting

Appeal No. 1 of 2019; and

(b) to pass any such order/s which this Hon'ble Court

may deem fit and proper.

(SANJAY KAPUR)
Advocate for the Appellant/ Applicant

Filed on: 11.0i.2019