Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.40 seconds)
Sanchit Gupta vs Union Of India And Anr. on 23 July, 2024 cites

Zee Telefilms Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 2 February, 2005

10. X Corp. provides a digital platform for communication and social interaction. It serves as a medium for public discourse, facilitating the exchange of information and ideas on a scale that is both vast and instantaneous. Importantly, it is a privately owned entity that operates without specific governmental delegation or statutory obligations to perform any public duty. While 'X' plays a critical role in information dissemination and influencing public opinion, its core function is to provide a platform for 2 Zee Telefilms Ltd v. Union of India (2005) 4 SCC 649; See also: Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V.R. Rudani, (1989) 2 SCC 691 3 G Bassi Reddy v International Crops Research Institute (2003) 2 SCC 225 Ramesh Alhuwalia v. State of Punjab (2012) 12 SCC 331 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 10030/2024 Page 6 of 9 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:02.08.2024 18:01:44 expression--a service that has 'public discourse' as consequence, yet is private in operation. There is no directive, statutory or otherwise, from the government that delegates traditional state functions to 'X'. The platform is not mandated to carry out public duties. 'X' is voluntary and user-driven, distinguishing it from entities that operate under a compulsion of law or provide services that are essential public utilities. The Supreme Court's judgments involving non-state actors like private schools are illustrative. These entities have been considered amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 when performing functions like education4 due to the public nature of these services and often due to specific regulatory frameworks governing their operations. In contrast, the function of 'X' as a communication platform, does not align with these precedents as it lacks statutory compulsion. Furthermore, the function or service of providing a platform for communication or social interaction cannot be called be a function similar to that of a governmental function or integral to state functions. Thus, it cannot be said that X Corp performs a public function or discharges a public duty.
Supreme Court of India Cites 94 - Cited by 404 - Full Document

Anandi Mukta Sadguru Shree Mukta ... vs V.R. Rudani & Ors on 21 April, 1989

10. X Corp. provides a digital platform for communication and social interaction. It serves as a medium for public discourse, facilitating the exchange of information and ideas on a scale that is both vast and instantaneous. Importantly, it is a privately owned entity that operates without specific governmental delegation or statutory obligations to perform any public duty. While 'X' plays a critical role in information dissemination and influencing public opinion, its core function is to provide a platform for 2 Zee Telefilms Ltd v. Union of India (2005) 4 SCC 649; See also: Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V.R. Rudani, (1989) 2 SCC 691 3 G Bassi Reddy v International Crops Research Institute (2003) 2 SCC 225 Ramesh Alhuwalia v. State of Punjab (2012) 12 SCC 331 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 10030/2024 Page 6 of 9 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:02.08.2024 18:01:44 expression--a service that has 'public discourse' as consequence, yet is private in operation. There is no directive, statutory or otherwise, from the government that delegates traditional state functions to 'X'. The platform is not mandated to carry out public duties. 'X' is voluntary and user-driven, distinguishing it from entities that operate under a compulsion of law or provide services that are essential public utilities. The Supreme Court's judgments involving non-state actors like private schools are illustrative. These entities have been considered amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 when performing functions like education4 due to the public nature of these services and often due to specific regulatory frameworks governing their operations. In contrast, the function of 'X' as a communication platform, does not align with these precedents as it lacks statutory compulsion. Furthermore, the function or service of providing a platform for communication or social interaction cannot be called be a function similar to that of a governmental function or integral to state functions. Thus, it cannot be said that X Corp performs a public function or discharges a public duty.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 559 - K J Shetty - Full Document

G. Bassi Reddy vs International Crops Research Instt. & ... on 14 February, 2003

10. X Corp. provides a digital platform for communication and social interaction. It serves as a medium for public discourse, facilitating the exchange of information and ideas on a scale that is both vast and instantaneous. Importantly, it is a privately owned entity that operates without specific governmental delegation or statutory obligations to perform any public duty. While 'X' plays a critical role in information dissemination and influencing public opinion, its core function is to provide a platform for 2 Zee Telefilms Ltd v. Union of India (2005) 4 SCC 649; See also: Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V.R. Rudani, (1989) 2 SCC 691 3 G Bassi Reddy v International Crops Research Institute (2003) 2 SCC 225 Ramesh Alhuwalia v. State of Punjab (2012) 12 SCC 331 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 10030/2024 Page 6 of 9 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:02.08.2024 18:01:44 expression--a service that has 'public discourse' as consequence, yet is private in operation. There is no directive, statutory or otherwise, from the government that delegates traditional state functions to 'X'. The platform is not mandated to carry out public duties. 'X' is voluntary and user-driven, distinguishing it from entities that operate under a compulsion of law or provide services that are essential public utilities. The Supreme Court's judgments involving non-state actors like private schools are illustrative. These entities have been considered amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 when performing functions like education4 due to the public nature of these services and often due to specific regulatory frameworks governing their operations. In contrast, the function of 'X' as a communication platform, does not align with these precedents as it lacks statutory compulsion. Furthermore, the function or service of providing a platform for communication or social interaction cannot be called be a function similar to that of a governmental function or integral to state functions. Thus, it cannot be said that X Corp performs a public function or discharges a public duty.
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 103 - R Pal - Full Document

Ramesh Ahluwalia vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 13 September, 2012

10. X Corp. provides a digital platform for communication and social interaction. It serves as a medium for public discourse, facilitating the exchange of information and ideas on a scale that is both vast and instantaneous. Importantly, it is a privately owned entity that operates without specific governmental delegation or statutory obligations to perform any public duty. While 'X' plays a critical role in information dissemination and influencing public opinion, its core function is to provide a platform for 2 Zee Telefilms Ltd v. Union of India (2005) 4 SCC 649; See also: Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V.R. Rudani, (1989) 2 SCC 691 3 G Bassi Reddy v International Crops Research Institute (2003) 2 SCC 225 Ramesh Alhuwalia v. State of Punjab (2012) 12 SCC 331 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 10030/2024 Page 6 of 9 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:02.08.2024 18:01:44 expression--a service that has 'public discourse' as consequence, yet is private in operation. There is no directive, statutory or otherwise, from the government that delegates traditional state functions to 'X'. The platform is not mandated to carry out public duties. 'X' is voluntary and user-driven, distinguishing it from entities that operate under a compulsion of law or provide services that are essential public utilities. The Supreme Court's judgments involving non-state actors like private schools are illustrative. These entities have been considered amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 when performing functions like education4 due to the public nature of these services and often due to specific regulatory frameworks governing their operations. In contrast, the function of 'X' as a communication platform, does not align with these precedents as it lacks statutory compulsion. Furthermore, the function or service of providing a platform for communication or social interaction cannot be called be a function similar to that of a governmental function or integral to state functions. Thus, it cannot be said that X Corp performs a public function or discharges a public duty.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 446 - H L Gokhale - Full Document

St. Marys Education Society vs Rajendra Prasad Bhargava on 24 August, 2022

11. In conclusion, despite its significant role in public discourse and the potential impact on public opinion and democratic engagement, 'X' does not perform a 'public function' in the strict legal sense intended under Article 226 of the Constitution. The platform operates as a private entity under private law and does not carry out any governmental duties or obligations. Therefore, it is not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 as 4 St. Mary's Education Society v. Rajendra Prasad Bhargava, (2023) 4 SCC 498.
Supreme Court of India Cites 39 - Cited by 84 - Full Document
1   2 Next