Meta Platforms Inc has approached the Delhi High Court challenging a Central Consumer Protection Authority order imposing a Rs 10 lakh penalty over the alleged unauthorised listing and sale of walkie-talkies on Facebook Marketplace, arguing that the platform functions only as a “notice board” and not an e-commerce marketplace.
Appearing for Meta, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi contended that, unlike platforms such as Amazon and Flipkart, Facebook does not facilitate transactions or charge commissions, and therefore falls outside the jurisdiction of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA).
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav listed the matter for hearing on March 25 and asked Meta to clarify how the regulator’s order could be termed “without jurisdiction”. The court also questioned why the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission could not adjudicate the dispute.
Arguing the case, Rohatgi said Facebook does not provide any infrastructure for completing sales. “We are not providing virtual Khan Market. This is a notice board meant only for Facebook users. We are not a shop. No commercial sales are allowed. No consideration is charged. We don't charge anybody.
“It is a facility of a notice board meant for sale... Mr Rohatgi has a phone to sell; someone wants to buy. The platform doesn't charge anything or provide any mechanism to buy or sell. Mr Rohatgi will have to contact him,” he said.
The CCPA, in its January 1, 2026 order, held that Meta violated provisions of the Consumer Protection Act and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules by allowing listings of walkie-talkies without mandatory disclosures.
In its petition, Meta maintained that Facebook Marketplace is a free service meant exclusively for individuals to sell or exchange goods in a personal capacity, and does not permit businesses or commercial sellers to create listings. It argued that the regulator acted beyond its jurisdiction by treating the platform as an e-commerce entity.
The plea further alleged violation of principles of natural justice and criticised the regulator’s interpretation of the law. “To circumvent the plain language of the E-Commerce Rules and clear statutory frameworks, the Authority adopts a strained interpretation under which any digital platform that hosts repeated listings of regulated goods is brought within the E-Commerce Rules.
“This approach renders the exclusion illusory and would extend the Rules to virtually every digital platform, including online newspapers and community forums, that allow users to post listings of everyday consumer items like toys, footwear and water bottles – all of which are regulated goods,” the petition said.
“The resulting burden would fall squarely on natural persons selling goods in a personal capacity, as ordinary household items would suddenly trigger regulatory compliance. Such an outcome is plainly inconsistent with both the text and purpose of the E-Commerce Rules," it added.
Meta also argued that the CCPA overstepped its authority by ruling on alleged violations of intermediary guidelines, which fall under the jurisdiction of the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
In its order, the CCPA directed Meta to ensure that no walkie-talkies or other products requiring statutory approval are listed, hosted, advertised or sold on its platform without full compliance with applicable laws and mandatory disclosures. It also asked the company to conduct periodic self-audits of listings and publish compliance certificates.
The regulator had earlier taken suo motu cognisance of the “large-scale illegal listing and sale of walkie-talkies (Personal Mobile Radios) on e-commerce platforms” and identified over 16,970 non-compliant listings. Notices were issued to 13 platforms, including Amazon, Flipkart, Meesho, and JioMart.
