'Why Has Response Not Been Filed Despite Previous Directions?': Madras High Court Pulls Up Centre For Delay In Filing Response To Pleas Challenging IT Rules 2021

The Madras High Court on Wednesday took serious objection to a request made by a counsel for the Union of India to grant more time to file its response to petitions challenging the validity of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules, 2021). The Court is currently adjudicating upon two writ petitions challenging the constitutionality of the IT Rules, 2021. Last month, the Madras High Court had issued a notice on a plea filed by acclaimed Carnatic vocalist and Ramon Magsaysay awardee TM Krishna who has challenged the rule claiming that they impose "arbitrary, vague, disproportionate and unreasonable" restrictions on digital news media and social media intermediaries. Notice was also issued on the plea filed by the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) as well as journalist Mukund Padmanabhan, challenging the constitutionality of the IT, and seeking a declaration of the same as "ultra vires, void and violative of Articles 14, Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India". On June 23, the Madras High Court had tagged both the matters together and had further granted liberty to the Petitioners to approach the High Court in case any coercive action was taken against them under Rules 12, 14, and 16 of the 2021 IT Rules.On July 14, the Court had granted the Central government two weeks to file its counter-affidavit before adjourning the hearing by three weeks. It was also pointed out to the Court on Wednesday that the Union had sought time to file its response on the last date of hearing as well. Accordingly, the Bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice P.D Audikesavalu observed with dismay, "Learned Additional Solicitor General should explain why appropriate measures should not be taken against those responsible for not filing the counter-affidavit on behalf of the Union despite the previous directions" On the last date of hearing, the Court had been apprised that a petition had been filed before the Supreme Court seeking the transfer of all proceedings concerning the IT Rules, 2021 from various High Courts to the Supreme Court. However, the Madras High Court had observed it would go ahead with the hearing nevertheless since the Supreme Court had not issued any stay on the High Court proceedings."Merely because you filed a transfer application, does that mean that proceedings before the High Court have stayed? We will go ahead with the matter. The Supreme Court will have the benefit of the opinion of the High Court", the bench had orally remarked. Accordingly, the Bench adjourned the matter till August 13 with the direction that the matter must appear on the top of the list for adjudication on the next date. Case Title: Digital News Publishers Association v. Union of IndiaClick Here To Read/Download Order

'Why Has Response Not Been Filed Despite Previous Directions?': Madras High Court Pulls Up Centre For Delay In Filing Response To Pleas Challenging IT Rules 2021

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags