Kerala High Court
Cable Operators Welfare Association vs Nil on 15 July, 2016
Author: P.B. Suresh Kumar
Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAYOF JULY 2016/24TH ASHADHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 21053 of 2016 (F)
------------------------------------------
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER(S) :
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CABLE OPERATORS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,
JAIHIND BUILDING, KUMBALAPALLY ROAD, CHALIKKAVATTOM,
VENNALA P.O, ERNAKULAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARYRAJEEV K.C.
BY ADV. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENT(S) :
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, I & PR DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR/ DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
COCHIN 682 030.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR/ DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM.
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR/ DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR/ DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KOTTAYAM.
6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA.
7. UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
AND BROAD CASTING, ROOM NO 560, A-WING, SHASTHRI
BHAVAN, NEW DELHI.
8. TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (TRAI),
MAHANAGAR, DOOR SANCHAR BHAVAN, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU
MARG, NEW DELHI.
..2/-
..2..
WP(C).No. 21053 of 2016 (F)
------------------------------------------
9. DEN NET WORKS LIMITED,
KOSHY ARCADE, OPPOSITE OBRON MALL,
ANCHUMANA PYEPASS ROAD, ERNAKULAM.
R1 TO R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE
R7 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
BY ADV. SRI.S.BIJU, CGC
R9 BY ADVS. SRI.P.JAYABAL MENON
SRI.JAGAN ABRAHAM M.GEORGE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 21053 of 2016 (F)
------------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR.
EXHIBIT P2 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LIST OF MEMBERS OF
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF INTERIM ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN W.P(C).NO.9052/2016.
EXHIBIT P4 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF BROADCASTING PETITION NO.354/2016
FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE TD SAT.
EXHIBIT P5 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN W.P(C).NO.9052/2016.
EXHIBIT P6 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CUSTOMER ACTIVATION FORM
ISSUED BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT TO ONE OF THE SUBSCRIBER.
EXHIBIT P7 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CASH RECEIPT FOR ACTIVATION
CHARGES ISSUED BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT TO ONE OF
MEMBERS OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY
THE 9TH RESPONDENT TO ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY
THE 9TH RESPONDENT TO ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P10 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE STB TRANSFER NOTE ISSUED BY
THE 9TH RESPONDENT TO ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF
THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 21053 of 2016
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of July, 2016
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is an association of the Local Cable TV Operators. The case of the petitioner in the writ petition is that the nineth respondent, a Multi System Operator, who is bound to ensure that the Set Top Boxes supplied by them to the members of the petitioner association are repaired or replaced without any extra charges, is not discharging the said duty cast upon them by virtue of the provisions contained in the Standards of the Quality of Service (Digital Addressable Cable TV Systems) Regulation, 2012. The petitioners have, therefore, approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) Issue a writ of Mandamus, such other writ, order or direction compelling the 9th respondent to repair/replace the Set W.P.(C) No. 21053 of 2016 -2- Top Boxes provided by it to the subscribers of the members of the petitioner without charging any service charge and within the statutory period of 24 Hours when malfunctioning of Set Top Box is reported to it,
(b) Issue a writ of Mandamus, such other writ, order or direction compelling the respondents 2 to 6 to ensure that the 9th respondent does repair/replace the Set Top Boxes provided by it to the subscribers of the members of the petitioner without charging any service charge and within the statutory period of 24 Hours when malfunctioning of Set Top Box is reported to it in compliance with Regulation 17 of the Standards of the Quality of Service (Digital Addressable Cable TV Systems) Regulations, 2012."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Central Government Counsel as also the learned Counsel for the third respondent.
3. It is conceded that a dispute of this nature falls within the jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal constituted under Section 14 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act. It is also conceded that the Appellate Tribunal constituted under Section 14 of the said Act is functioning at present. There is nothing on record to indicate that the said alternative remedy available to the petitioner is not W.P.(C) No. 21053 of 2016 -3- efficacious in any manner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the Appellate Tribunal has sittings only at New Delhi and the members of the petitioner, who are the local cable TV operators, may not afford to go to New Delhi for resolution of a dispute of this nature. I am afraid, such an argument cannot be accepted to entertain a writ petition of this nature.
In the result, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the Appellate Tribunal constituted under Section 14 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, for redressal of their grievance.
Sd/-
P.B. SURESH KUMAR JUDGE bpr