Latest news with #PublicInterestLitigation
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Adman Sandeep Goyal seeks government grip on surrogate ads in High Court battle
HighlightsSandeep Goyal, managing director of Rediffusion Brand Solutions, has filed a Public Interest Litigation in the Punjab and Haryana High Court advocating for a government-led regulatory body to address surrogate advertising issues. The petition highlights violations of key regulations, including the Cable Television Network Rules of 1994 and the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act of 2003, citing examples of surrogate advertising from prominent brands like Vimal Elaichi and Pan Bahar. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has acknowledged the petition, issuing notices to the Central Government, Central Consumer Protection Authority, and Central Board of Film Certification, indicating serious public health concerns related to misleading advertising practices. In a significant legal challenge, veteran adman Sandeep Goyal , the managing director of Rediffusion Brand Solutions , has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court , urging for a direct government-led regulatory body to curb the pervasive issue of surrogate advertising . The petition, currently under the scrutiny of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel, contends that existing self-regulatory frameworks are insufficient and too sluggish to combat the real-time impact of these misleading promotions. Goyal, who has consistently refused to work with tobacco and alcohol brands since their advertising was banned in India, asserts that he holds no personal or financial stake in the outcome. His PIL highlights what he describes as blatant violations of crucial regulations, including the Cable Television Network Rules 1994, the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act 2003, and the CCPA Guidelines on Misleading Advertisements 2022. The petition specifically points to prominent examples of alleged surrogate advertising, citing brands like Vimal Elaichi, Rajshree Silver Coated Elaichi, and Pan Bahar. These ads, often featuring well-known celebrities, are frequently seen during prime-time television slots and high-profile events such as IPL broadcasts. Goyal argues that such promotions subtly endorse restricted products, misleading consumers and contributing to a growing public health crisis, particularly among young people. "The country is undergoing a health crisis wherein the youth of the nation is getting addicted to alcohol and tobacco at a tender age," the petition states, emphasizing how celebrity endorsements "glamorize" and "validate" the consumption of these products. The PIL underscores the ineffectiveness of current industry self-regulation, including the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), in adequately reining in these deceptive practices. Goyal's petition, argued by advocate Aadil Singh Boparai, seeks strict enforcement of existing laws and guidelines. Crucially, it calls for a more robust, government-led mechanism to actively supervise all advertising content. The High Court has taken cognizance of the matter, issuing notices to the central government, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). This move signals the judiciary's recognition of the potential public health implications of unchecked surrogate advertising, setting the stage for a significant legal debate on the future of advertising regulation in India.
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Business
- Indian Express
Adman Sandeep Goyal moves Punjab & Haryana HC against surrogate ads, seeks govt-led regulatory mechanism
In a significant move to curb the growing menace of surrogate advertisements promoting alcohol and tobacco, veteran adman Sandeep Goyal has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. It seeks strict enforcement of existing laws aimed at safeguarding public health—particularly that of youth. A bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel issued notices to the central government, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). Goyal, a 62-year-old Chandigarh resident and Managing Director of Rediffusion Brand Solutions Private Limited, has long opposed surrogate ads and has refused to work with tobacco and alcohol brands since their advertising was banned in India. With no personal or fiduciary interest in the case, his petition cites blatant violations of the Cable Television Network Rules 1994, the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act 2003, and the CCPA Guidelines on Misleading Advertisements 2022. The petition, argued by advocate Aadil Singh Boparai, highlights prominent examples of alleged surrogate advertising—including spots for brands like Vimal Elaichi, Rajshree Silver Coated Elaichi, and Pan Bahar—that aired on primetime TV, including IPL broadcasts. These celebrity-endorsed promotions, Goyal argues, mislead consumers and glamourize restricted products, fuelling a public health crisis. Studies have linked such advertising to increased tobacco and alcohol use among teenagers. 'The country is undergoing a health crisis wherein the youth of the nation is getting addicted to alcohol and tobacco at a tender age. It is submitted that the advertisements, which use renowned celebrities to advertise their product, not only promote the consumption of alcohol and tobacco but also validate their consumption through glamorous portrayal of alcohol and tobacco products,' says the petition. The petition underscores the ineffectiveness of current self-regulatory frameworks, including those of the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), in curbing misleading promotions. Goyal calls for a more robust, government-led regulatory mechanism to oversee advertising content. The petition seeks the following reliefs: • A writ of mandamus directing enforcement of the ASCI's Code for Self-Regulation in Advertising. • A writ of mandamus directing implementation of the CCPA's 2022 Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements. • A writ of mandamus for enforcement of the Cable Television Network Rules 1994. • Any other directions the court deems appropriate. Goyal contends that existing redressal mechanisms are too slow to counter the real-time impact of such ads, which continue to reach large audiences before any regulatory action is taken. He also draws on Supreme Court and high court observations calling for stronger regulatory oversight in the advertising sector. Calling for stricter enforcement, the petition states, 'It is the assertion of the Petitioner that the growing problem of surrogate advertisements can be effectively tackled only by a Complaint Redressal Mechanism which works under the direct aegis of the Central Government and supervises all advertisements being published/broadcast.'
India Today
2 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
Unlawful: Karnataka High Court stops government order withdrawing criminal cases
The Karnataka High Court struck down the state government's October 2024 decision to withdraw 43 criminal cases, including those linked to the 2022 Old Hubballi riots. The cases involved activists from various organisations, politicians, and other influential High Court's ruling is deemed as a legal setback for the government, which ordered the withdrawal order on October 10. This decision was challenged through a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by advocate Girish Bharadwaj, who questioned the legality of the division bench led by Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind admitted the PIL and expressed serious concerns over the government's action. In its ruling, the court declared the withdrawal order unlawful and also quashed the follow-up government notification dated October 15, verdict prevents the Karnataka government from proceeding with the withdrawal of these high-profile criminal opposition BJP had earlier criticised Karnataka's move to withdraw the Hubbali riots case, alleging that the Congress government is appeasing the Muslim Leader of Opposition Aravind Bellad slammed the decision, saying, 'These are the people who attacked the police station and the police. They tried to burn the police alive. But the Congress government, to appease the Muslim community and minority votes, is doing this. That is there in the Congress DNA.'Must Watch IN THIS STORY#Karnataka
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Unauthorised occupation of govt bungalows: Furnish latest status report by July 7, HC tells J&K govt
A division bench of the J&K and Ladakh high court (HC) comprising chief justice Arun Palli and justice Rajnesh Oswal on Wednesday granted last opportunity to J&K government to furnish latest status report pertaining to unauthorised occupation of government bungalows by former chief minister (CM) Ghulam Nabi Azad and former J&K BJP chief Ravinder Raina by July 7. The directions were issued during the hearing of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking eviction of overstaying ex-ministers, former legislators and politicians in government accommodation. The division bench granted last opportunity to senior additional advocate general (AAG) SS Nanda appearing for estates department to furnish the latest status report in terms of order dated March 26 before the adjourned date. The bench stated that failing in complying the directions, chairman of the designated committee would appear before the court or by the virtual mode on the next date of hearing. IGP of the CID is the chairman of the designated committee. During the hearing, petitioner's counsel advocate Sheikh Shakeel Ahmed drew the attention of the division bench towards order dated March 26, wherein the division bench had granted three weeks' time to file the status report with regard to the accommodation. On March 26, senior AAG SS Nanda had submitted that the designated committee is likely to review the allotment of accommodation of the two politicians. Advocate Ahmed further submitted that the March 26 directions of the bench have not been complied with and the designated committee has not reviewed the matter regarding allotment of accommodation to two high profile politicians. He further submitted that the apex court has ruled in catena of judgements that once a public man demits his office then he/she becomes an ordinary person and is not entitled to government accommodation. After considering the submissions of advocate Ahmed, the bench headed by chief justice Arun Palli in the open court expressed concern over the dilatory tactics and observed that this PIL was pending for the last five years.
India Gazette
3 days ago
- Politics
- India Gazette
Delhi HC rejects PIL seeking formation of Gujjar regiment in Indian Army
New Delhi [India], May 28 (ANI): The Delhi High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on Wednesday that urged the Union of India and the Ministry of Defence to establish a Gujjar Regiment in the Indian Army. The bench, comprising Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, emphasised that government policy mandates equal recruitment opportunities for all citizens, irrespective of class, creed, region, or religion. Expressing dissatisfaction with the plea, the bench criticised the petitioner's attempt to seek the formation of a regiment based on a specific caste. The bench questioned the legal and constitutional basis for the petition, asking the petitioner whether any law or provision in the Constitution grants the right to demand the formation of a separate regiment in the Army. The court emphasised that regiments are formed by integrating people from various regions and communities to uphold national unity. Acknowledging the court's objections, the petitioner's counsel opted to withdraw the plea. Consequently, the bench disposed of the matter, declaring it dismissed as withdrawn. During the hearing, Advocate Monika Arora, representing the Union of India, informed the court that since Independence, the government has maintained a policy of not forming new regiments based on specific communities, classes, religions, or regions to ensure equitable recruitment opportunities. She further highlighted that various petitions, VIP references, parliamentary questions, and private member bills have sought the creation of new regiments based on historical figures, national heroes, and regional identities. Still, the government has remained steadfast in its policy. Petitioner Rohan Basoya contended that the Gujjar community has a long-standing history of bravery, citing their participation in the 1857 Revolt, Indo-Pak Wars of 1947, 1965, and 1971, the Kargil War (1999), and counterinsurgency operations in Jammu & Kashmir. Despite this legacy, they have not been granted a dedicated regiment, unlike other martial communities such as Sikhs, Jats, Rajputs, Gorkhas, and Dogras. The plea further argued that the Indian Army has historically maintained ethnic-based regiments to recognise the contributions of specific communities to national defence. The exclusion of Gujjars, the petitioner asserted, creates an imbalance in representation and violates their constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Indian Constitution. Establishing a Gujjar Regiment would provide equal opportunities, enhance recruitment, and strengthen national security. Additionally, the plea stated that the demand for a Gujjar Regiment has been raised multiple times, yet the government has taken no concrete steps. Given the community's significant presence in border regions such as Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Punjab, a Gujjar Regiment would also serve strategic military interests in counterinsurgency and border security operations. (ANI)
