P.Balakrishnan v. The Secretary
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31.01.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P.(MD)No.20008 of 2019 P.Balakrishnan ... Petitioner versus
1. The Secretary, The Ministry for Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 2, Krishna Menon Marg, New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Nodal Officer/District Revenue Officer, Madurai,
3. The Chief Post Master General, Office of the Post Master General, Anna Road, Chennai.
4. The Postal Superintendent, 1/6
5. The Post Master, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District.
6. M.Sownthirarajan
7. The Special Tahsildar / Assistant Manager, Tamil Nadu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to initiate action against the 6th and 7th respondents for illegally transmitting Analogue Signal in violation of Section 4A Cable TV Network Regulation Act and seize the equipments used by the 6th respondent for transmission of Analogue Signal and consequently, prosecute the 6th respondent under Cable Television Network Regulation Act, 1994, based on the representation of the petitioner dated 01.11.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth For R1, R3 to R5 : Mr.M.Ashok Kumar, Central Government Standing Counsel For R2 : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, Additional Government Pleader For R6 : No appearance 2/6
For R7 : Mrs.S.Devasena Standing Counsel
ORDER
The petitioner is a Cable TV Operator. He has filed this writ petition in the year 2019, alleging that the 6th respondent is transmitting Analogue Signal in violation of Section 4A Cable TV Network Regulation Act and therefore, he seeks for a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to take action against the 6th respondent and to seize the equipments used by him for transmission of Analogue Signal and to prosecute him under Cable Television Network Regulation Act, 1994, based on his representation dated 01.11.2019.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that after 2017, no one is permitted to distribute the signals through Analogue system and the petitioner has not substantiated his case that the 6th respondent has distributed the signals only through Analogue system.
3/6
3. Though notice was served on the 6th respondent and his name has been printed in the cause list, there is no representation for the 6th respondent.
4. It is not known as to whether the 6th respondent is still in the field of Cable TV Network. In the event, if the 6th respondent is still continuing distribution of signals through Analogue System, the petitioner is at liberty to give a complaint to the second respondent/the Nodal Officer/District Revenue Officer, Madurai.
5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 31.01.2024 ogy NCC : Yes / No.
Index : Yes / No.
Internet : Yes / No.
4/6
To
1. The Secretary, The Ministry for Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 2, Krishna Menon Marg, New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Nodal Officer/District Revenue Officer, Madurai,
3. The Chief Post Master General, Office of the Post Master General, Anna Road, Chennai.
4. The Postal Superintendent,
5. The Post Master, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District.
6. The Special Tahsildar / Assistant Manager, Tamil Nadu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., 5/6
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy 31.01.2024 6/6