Kerala HC posts TV ratings hearing to July 21; AIDCF says MIB bypassing SC proceedings

The Kerala High Court on Monday posted to July 21 the challenge mounted by the All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF) and DEN Networks against the Centre's Television Rating Policy, 2026, with the petitioners arguing that the government's decision to exclude "landing page" viewership from Television Rating Points (TRPs) seeks to achieve indirectly what the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has been restrained from enforcing in pending proceedings before the Supreme Court.

The matter came up before Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, where senior counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting's (MIB) revised television ratings framework suffers from arbitrariness, bypasses the statutory role of TRAI and poses far-reaching consequences for the cable television distribution industry.

Following submissions from both sides, the court listed the matter for further hearing on July 21.

The hearing assumes significance as it comes after the Centre filed its affidavit defending the Television Rating Policy, 2026, and sought the vacation of the interim stay granted by the High Court on the implementation of the provision excluding landing page-generated viewership from audience measurement.

Petitioners allege Centre is doing indirectly what SC barred

During the hearing, counsel for AIDCF argued that the issue before the Kerala High Court is intrinsically linked to the long-pending litigation before the Supreme Court concerning TRAI's attempts to regulate landing page placements.

"There was a policy in 2014 that emerged after a consultative process involving TRAI. The issue that engaged TRAI then was the alleged distortion of television ratings arising out of landing pages. That is precisely the issue before the court today," counsel submitted.

The petitioners argued that although the present policy has been framed by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting rather than TRAI, the effect remains substantially the same.

"Can you do indirectly what directly is prohibited?" counsel asked, arguing that the Centre has attempted to revive restrictions that have remained under judicial scrutiny before the apex court for several years.

According to the petitioners, the ministry framed the policy without referring the issue to TRAI despite audience measurement and television distribution being matters that directly affect regulated service providers under the TRAI Act.

The counsel maintained that the present policy effectively amounts to regulation of distribution platforms while sidestepping the statutory consultation process that accompanied the earlier 2014 framework.

Existing safeguards ignored

The petitioners further argued that the Centre had failed to justify why existing safeguards developed by the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) were insufficient.

Counsel submitted that BARC's own technical framework already contains mechanisms to distinguish passive exposure from genuine viewer engagement through its Landing Page Algorithm (LPA).

"Where is the finding anywhere that this is inadequate?" counsel asked, contending that the government had produced no material demonstrating deficiencies in BARC's existing methodology before introducing a blanket exclusion of landing page-generated viewership.

The petitioners maintained that executive policy decisions cannot escape judicial scrutiny merely because they are framed as policy measures.

Referring to recent Supreme Court jurisprudence, counsel argued that executive action and subordinate legislation must satisfy constitutional standards of reasonableness and cannot be arbitrary.

"Everything has to be informed with reason," counsel submitted, urging the court to closely examine the rationale behind the revised framework.

Cable industry warns of serious commercial impact

The petitioners also emphasised the economic implications of the policy for India's cable television industry.

Landing pages—the default television channels displayed when viewers switch on their set-top boxes—have long served as a source of commercial arrangements between broadcasters and Multi-System Operators (MSOs).

According to the petitioners, excluding such viewership from official ratings substantially erodes the commercial value of landing page placements and threatens an important revenue stream for distribution platform operators already facing mounting competition from over-the-top (OTT) platforms and digital media.

Counsel argued that if landing page viewership ceases to have any commercial significance, it would discourage investments in television distribution and adversely affect smaller broadcasters as well as new channel launches.

"This has very far-reaching consequences for us. How will new channels come up? If this ceases to be an available source of revenue, it will completely starve the industry," counsel submitted before the court.

The petitioners also reiterated that the policy infringes their fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution by disproportionately interfering with legitimate commercial activity.

Centre distinguishes policy from Supreme Court dispute

The Union government, however, maintained that the Television Rating Policy, 2026 operates in an entirely different regulatory domain from the litigation pending before the Supreme Court.

The Centre argued that the policy does not prohibit or regulate landing pages themselves but merely excludes viewership arising from such placements from official audience measurement.

Government counsel also contended that the policy was introduced after an extensive consultative exercise involving stakeholders across the broadcasting ecosystem and aims to improve the integrity and credibility of television audience measurement.

The ministry has consistently maintained that landing pages generate passive exposure rather than deliberate viewing choices and that excluding such impressions would lead to more accurate television ratings.

During the hearing, counsel appearing for the ministry argued that the issue concerns audience measurement methodology rather than regulation of channel placement.

Debate over pending Supreme Court proceedings

A substantial part of Monday's hearing revolved around whether the present policy overlaps with the issues pending before the Supreme Court.

The petitioners argued that the underlying policy question in both cases remains identical—the impact of landing page placements on television ratings.

They pointed out that TRAI's earlier attempts to restrict landing pages had been challenged before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), which set aside the regulator's directions in 2019.

Although the Supreme Court subsequently stayed the TDSAT judgment, the petitioners argued that TRAI was not permitted to enforce the disputed restrictions during the pendency of the appeals.

Against that backdrop, the petitioners contended that the Ministry's 2026 ratings framework effectively seeks to produce the same commercial outcome through audience measurement methodology rather than direct regulation.

The government, however, disputed that interpretation and maintained that the two proceedings involve distinct regulatory questions.

Court fixes July 21 for detailed hearing

During the proceedings, counsel for the petitioners requested an early hearing, arguing that the issues raised extend beyond a single provision and require detailed consideration in light of the constitutional, statutory and regulatory questions involved.

The petitioners also pointed out that the government's response had been filed only recently and sought adequate opportunity to file a rejoinder addressing the issues raised in the affidavit.

After hearing both sides, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas posted the matter for July 21.

Background

AIDCF and DEN Networks have challenged the proviso to Clause 5.4.1 of the Television Rating Policy, 2026, notified by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on March 27.

The disputed provision states that viewership arising from landing pages shall not be counted for audience measurement, while permitting landing pages to continue as a marketing tool.

The petitioners contend that the provision is unconstitutional, arbitrary and commercially damaging because it strips landing page placements of their economic value while undermining the business model of cable television distribution platforms.

Earlier, the Kerala High Court had granted interim relief by staying the implementation of the landing page exclusion for television ratings, while allowing the remainder of the Television Rating Policy, 2026 to remain in force.

The outcome of the litigation is expected to have significant implications for broadcasters, advertisers, cable distribution platform operators and the future framework governing television audience measurement in India.