PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

SHOW TIME CABLE AND DATACOM (PVT.) LIMITED vs PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY Ss — 2022 CLC 254 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 CLC 254 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
CLC
Parties
SHOW TIME CABLE AND DATACOM (PVT.) LIMITED vs PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY Ss
Provisions referred to
S. 26

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

SHOW TIME CABLE AND DATACOM (PVT.) LIMITED VS PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY Ss.26(2) & 30-a---Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority (Council of Complaints) Rules, 2010, R. 8---Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority Rules, 2009, Schedule B, Table 1---Licence---Validation---Council of Complaints, jurisdiction of---Settlement of financial claim---appellant company was engaged in business of cable television operation---Grievance of appellant was that extension/revalidation of its license was made conditional subject to settlement of financial claim---Validity---Role of Council of Complaints under S.26(2) of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority Ordinance, 2002, was restricted to the contents of programs broadcasted and distributed--- Complaint in such regard could alone be lodged with Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority which could be marked to Council of Complaints for an opinion and recommendation---Provision of R.8 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority (Council of Complaints) Rules, 2010, provided room for grievance of complainant to the extent of a program or advertisement---Only on such count summons could be issued and not otherwise---Like other e-channels who were being charged in terms of Table 1, attached to Schedule B of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority Rules, 2009, which included licence fee, renewal fee and 5% annual gross advertisement revenue, appellant was also being charged Gross annual advertisement Revenue (GaaR) for their in-house channels only---In case of in-house channel relay, not only license fee and renewal fee was payable but advertisement revenue was also collected, like it was collected from other satellite TV channels---High Court declined to interfere in that matter as notice was rightly issued by the authority and appellant was supposed to deposit its outstanding dues---appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English