Advertisement

Home / Business / Supreme Court to hear Centre’s plea to club cases against new IT rules

Supreme Court to hear Centre’s plea to club cases against new IT rules

Several petitions challenging the new IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, are pending adjudication in different high courts
Supreme Court of India.
Supreme Court of India.
Shutterstock

PTI   |   New Delhi   |   Published 07.07.21, 02:20 AM

The Supreme Court is likely to hear this week the Centre’s petition seeking transfer of the pleas pending in different high courts challenging the validity of new IT Rules to the apex court for an authoritative pronouncement on the issue. 

Several petitions challenging the new Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, are pending adjudication in different high courts, including the high courts of Delhi and Madras. 

Advertisement

The Delhi high court had sought a response from the Centre on these petitions. 

According to the new IT Rules, social media and streaming companies will be required to take down contentious content quicker, appoint grievance redressal officers and assist in investigations. 

The new rules also seek to regulate the functioning of online media portals and publishers, over-the-top (OTT) platforms and social media intermediaries.

According to the case status shown on the apex court website, the Centre's plea, which was filed earlier, is likely to be listed for hearing on July 9. 

Query for Twitter 

The Delhi High Court Tuesday directed Twitter to inform it by July 8 as to when it will appoint a resident grievance officer (RGO) in compliance with the new IT Rules after the microblogging platform submitted that it was in the process of doing so.  

Justice Rekha Palli took exception to the fact the court was not informed that the earlier appointment of the RGO was only on interim basis and he has already resigned. 

The high court pointed out that only an interim RGO was appointed by Twitter and a wrong impression was given to the court on May 31 as it was not informed that the appointment was on interim basis.



Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
 
 
 
Copyright © 2020 The Telegraph. All rights reserved.