CABLE TELEVISION NETWORK (REGULATION) ACT,

1995 and TRAI ACT, 1997

By
Rupak Kumar Joshi
Assistant Professor
ICFAI University, Dehradun.
 Contents

➢Introduction.
➢Cable Television Network Act
➢TRAI Act
➢Cases
Introduction and Concept
➢Before the introduction of cable television in India, broadcasting was
solely under the control of the State.
➢Government of India was caught unprepared with the emergence of
cable networks and broadcasting through satellites in the early 1990s.
The Government was not able to put a check on transmission and
broadcast of television through foreign satellites.
➢The necessity of procuring licence for operating cable networks was
first mentioned by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shiv Cable
TV System v. State of Rajasthan, in which the Rajsthan High Court
cable networks fall within the definition of “wireless telegraph
apparatus” under the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act and therefore it
necessary to have licence to operate such network.
Introduction
➢Both codes under Rule 6 and 7, Cable Television Networks Rules
Contain widely and loosely worded restrictions, most echoing those
contained in Art. 19(2).
➢The Programme Code prescribes that no programme should be
carried in the cable service which contravenes the provisions of the
Cinematograph Act, 1953.
➢Some restrictions are wider and not strictly within the scope of Art.
19(2)………….Rule 7(3), Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994,
prohibits advertisement with a religious or political object, which is
contracry to the Art. 25 of the Constitution i.e. right to propagate
religion.
Star India (P) Ltd. V. UOI:
Facts: SIPL telecasts a fictional program titled 'Sapna Babul Ka – Bidaai’.
The petitioner was found guilty by the Ministry of I&B of violating the
Programme Code, by portraying the sage Maharshi Valmiki in an
allegedly derogatory manner.
Held: the Delhi High court held that in order to attract Rule 6(I)©, it was
not enough to show a mere likelihood of certain words “ appearing
derogatory to a particular community” but more than that.
Court held that if the episode is seen as a whole in its context, it could
not be regarded as derogatory or contemptuous.
Object of the Act
➢to regulate the ‘haphazard mushrooming of cable television
networks’. The Act confines itself to the regulation of cable operators.
➢The Act aimed at regulating content and operation of cable
networks… due to the availability of signals from foreign television
networks via satellite communication…… access to foreign television
networks was considered to be a “cultural invasion” .
➢lay down the "responsibilities and obligations in respect of the quality
of service both technically as well content wise, use of materials
protected under the copyright law, exhibition of uncertified films, and
protection of subscribers from anti-national broadcasts from sources
inimical to national interests".
➢mandate a compulsory registration for cable operators
Content Regulation: The Central Government, in public interest
1. can put an obligation on every cable operator to transmit or
retransmit a programme of any pay channel through addressable
system.
2. may also ‘specify one or more free-to-air channels to be included in
the package of channels’ (basic service tier)
3. specify the maximum amount which can be charged by the operator
to the subscriber for receiving the programmes transmitted in the
basic service tier provided by such cable operators.
4. mandates ‘use of standard equipment in cable television network’.
5. deal with advertisement code and programme code. All cable
services should be in conformity with the codes.
Indian broadcast rules do not permit pre-censorship of TV programmes
and advertisements — that is banning them before they are aired —
and only films and film trailers are pre-certified by the Central Board of
Film Certification (CBFC).
• Section 20 of the Act, states that the government can regulate or
prohibit the transmission or retransmission of any programme that it
feels is not in conformity with the Programme and Advertising Code.
However, since there is no body to pre-certify content for TV,
potentially problematic programmes only come to notice once they
have been aired.
• The Electronic Media Monitoring Centre (EMMC), under the I&B
Ministry, monitors the content telecast on private TV channels to
check if they adhere to the Programme and Advertising Code.
Specific complaints on code violations are looked into by an inter-
ministerial committee (IMC).
Sub-section ‘c’ of Rule 6 specifically mentions that programmes that
contain attacks on religions or communities or visuals or words
contemptuous of religious groups or which promote communal
attitudes should not be carried in the cable service.
Authority under the Act: Under the Act, district magistrates, sub-
divisional magistrates and police commissioners are the ‘authorised
officers’ to ensure that the Programme Code is not breached.
Widely worded:
• Discretion of the authorised officer: The Code, which is part of the
Cable Television Network Rules, is widely worded.
• For instance, anything that offends good taste or decency, or
amounts to criticism of friendly countries, are violations.
• It also considers defamation, half-truths and innuendo as
potential violations.
• In the absence of judicial orders, it may be unsafe to leave such
matters to the discretion of the ‘authorised officer’.
• Public interest: A key consideration to decide on the content of any
broadcast that may be controversial is whether it touches upon any
public interest.
• Offences and Penalties
• Section 11 gives power to the authorized government authority to
seize any cable operator’s equipment, if such officer has reason to
believe that the cable operator is using the equipment without proper
registration.
• Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Act deal with offences under the Act.
They lay down punishments for any act which is in contravention with
the provisions of the Act.
• Sudarshan News case: Sudarshan TV’s programme ‘Bindas Bol — UPSC
Jihad’ ……… statutory authorities, notably the Ministry of Information
and Broadcasting with powers under the Cable TV Regulation Act and
the Programme Code had sufficient powers to take such action if
necessary for compliance with the law. The Ministry is empowered
under the Act to prohibit the transmission or retransmission of any
programme that violates the Programme Code. An authorised officer
also has the powers to prohibit a programme if it is “likely to promote”
hatred or ill-will between communities. The Programme Code is wide-
ranging and in relevant part prohibits a programme which “contains
attack on religions or communities or visuals or words contemptuous of
religious groups or which promote communal attitudes.”
Supreme Court found that the “intent, object and purpose of the
episodes which have been telecast is to vilify the Muslim community.”
 The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997
The main objective of the Act, 1997 was to establish the Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and Telecom Dispute Settlement
Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT). The main purpose of these two institutions
established under the TRAI Act is to regulate telecommunication services,
adjudicate disputes, dispose appeals and protect the interest of the
service providers as well as the consumers. The Act also aims at
promoting and ensuring orderly growth of the telecom sector.
TRAI (Amendment) Act, 2000: The Amendment Act established the
Telecom Dispute Settlement Appellate Tribunal to solely deal with
relevant disputes.
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 came after the
Delhi Science Forum v. Union of India case,when the Supreme Court
while deciding on the constitutionality of the National Telecom Policy,
1994 emphasized on the necessity of an independent statutory
authority in a deregulated and competitive telecom market.
Government Control over TRAI
not a completely independent telecom regulator. The Government
exercises certain amount of control... Under section 25 of the Act it has
the power to issue directions which are binding on TRAI. The TRAI is
also funded by the Central Government. Moreover, under section 35 of
the TRAI Act, the Central Government has the power to make rules on
various subjects and such rules are binding upon TRAI. ……not
completely independent as envisioned by the Supreme Court.
Functions of TRAI
According to the TRAI act amended in 2000, the functions of the original
TRAI have now been divided between two separate bodies namely:
i. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)
ii. The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal
The Recommendatory and Regulatory functions are vested with the
TRAI while dispute settlement functions are handled by the Appellate
Tribunal.
Recommendatory Functions of TRAI: The matters on which
recommendations are made are:
1. Need for the introduction of a new service provider and its timing.
2. Terms and Conditions of issuance of a license to a service provider.
3. Revocation of license due to non-compliance of terms and conditions
recommended by TRAI.
4. Steps to be taken to promote healthy competition, efficiency in
service and enable the growth of the industry.
5. Technological advancements in providing services.
6. Type of equipment used to ensure better services by the service
providers.
7. Measures of the development of technology and matters related to
the telecom industry in general. Encouraging research and innovation in
the industry
8. Effective management of the available spectrum (electromagnetic
spectrum in available frequencies)
Regulatory Functions of TRAI: Regulatory functions performed by TRAI
are as follows:
1. Ensure compliance of the terms and conditions mentioned in the
license.
2. Fix the terms and conditions of the interconnectivity of service
providers.
3. Ensure technical harmony and effectiveness in interconnectivity
between service providers.
4. Direct courses of action among organizations for sharing their
income received from providing services.
5. Set out the standards of quality of service and conduct surveys
periodically to protect the public interest and ensure better service.
7. Prescribe the time period for proving local/ long-distance circuits of
telecom.
8. Maintain a register containing all the interconnection agreements.
9. Ensure compliance of universal service obligation. Universal service
obligation refers to making the economic and social opportunities of
the telecom sector available to the public at large.
Other functions of TRAI
Sub-clause is a residuary clause which states that the administrative
and financial functions prescribed by the Central Government are to be
performed by the Authority for the effective implementation of this
Act. Under Section 11(1)(c) of the Act, TRAI is responsible for levying
fees and other charges as per the rates determined in the regulations.
The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal
By virtue of the TRAI Amendment Act 2000, the adjudicatory functions
of the TRAI are vested with a new body- The Telecom Disputes
Settlement and Appellate Tribunal .The functions of the Telecom
Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal are:
1. To adjudicate disputes between a licensor and a licensee, two or
more service provider and a group of consumers. However, the
Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to try any matter which deals with
anti-competitive trade practices or any consumer complaint.

2. ii. To hear and dispose of appeal against any direction, decision or

order of the TRAI.
This is the appellate function of the Tribunal provided as alternative to
filing an appeal in the High Court. An appeal from any order, other than
an interim order of the tribunal, lies with the Supreme Court of India.
 Telecom Regulatory Authority of India v. Bharti Airtel Ltd
Facts: The Telecommunication Tariff (63rdAmendment) Order, 2018
issued by TRAI on 16.02.2018 was challenged by Bharti Airtel Limited,
Idea Cellular Limited and Vodafone Mobile Services Limited. Apart from
“Reporting Requirements” and “Significant Market Power”(SMP), a
grievance was also raised against insistence of TRAI about the
disclosure of segmented discounts/concessions. The TSPs argued before
the Court that segmented offers constitute “confidentially designed
trade practices”
Held: Court said that that the information being sought by TRAI to
ensure adherence to the regulatory principles of transparency, non-
discrimination and non-predation, cannot be said, at least prima facie
to be either illegal or wholly unjustified. directed telecom giants Bharti
Airtel and Vodafone-Idea to disclose information/details regarding
segmented offers to TRAI. It asked TRAI to ensure that such information
is kept confidential and is not made available to the competitors or to
any other person.
THANK YOU.