M/S Netplus Broadband Services Private Limited v. Union Of India Thr Ministry Of Electronics And Information Technology And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-7729-2026 Date of Decision: 01.04.2026 M/S NETPLUS BROADBAND SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED

...Petitioner

Vs.

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Amrita Singh, Advocate for the respondent No.1 and 3 *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent to act in accordance with provisions of Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 and Information Technology Act, 2000.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.4 has illegally deleted petitioner's facebook page. It has preferred representation before Grievance Officer as well as appeal before Grievance Appellate Committee. The Committee has mechanically rejected its appeal.

3.

In view of orders of this Court, learned counsel for the respondent produced communication dated 30.03.2026 disclosing that petitioner's appeal has been rejected on the ground that it has not DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.04.01 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-7729-2026 -2approached Grievance Officer.

4.

Faced with this, Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out page 35 and 36 of the paperbook disclosing that he approached Grievance Officer on 09.09.2025. Getting no response from said officer, he approached Appellate Forum.

5.

Heard the arguments and perused the record.

6.

It appears that Appellate Forum has mechanically rejected petitioner's appeal. It has not taken care of the fact that petitioner in September' 2025 approached Grievance Officer. Neither Grievance Officer is acting in accordance with law nor Appellate Authority is discharging its duty. To resolve the issue, this Court finds it appropriate to direct Grievance Officer-respondent No.2 to pass a speaking order within 10 days from today, considering present petition as petitioner's representation besides communications dated 09.09.2025 and 10.09.2025 (Annexures P-4 and P-5). The petitioner would be at liberty to avail remedy as permissible by law if it feels aggrieved from order passed by Grievance Officer.

7.

Learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 3 would supply copy of this order to respondent No.2 by tomorrow. 8.

Disposed of.

9.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE April 01, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.04.01 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document