HYDERABAD, March 4 The Sindh High Court, Hyderabad circuit bench, on Wednesday issued notices to Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority officials and the Sindh information secretary for March 11 on a petition filed by a cable network operator.

According to the case of M/s Blue Birds cable TV Network filed by its chief executive officer Mohammad Ayub, represented by Ejaz Ali Hakro advocate, the petitioner requested Pemra Karachi to renew his licence and upgrade it from category B-2 to B-3 to cater to future expansion of Hyderabad Defence area for which he had paid an additional amount of Rs25,000, which was accepted.

As per condition 2.4 of license, it shall be valid for five years and shall be renewable for similar terms on payment of fee and subject to such conditions as authority may issue from time to time. According to condition 2.5, the late payment of license fee shall incur a surcharge of 5 per cent of license fee per month. His license had expired and he had contacted Pemra Karachi for its renewal for year 2009.

He said that respondent Pemra Karachi admitted that his license expired on December 31, 2008 but malafidely referred section 16 of Pemra Rules 2002 which is not applicable in the present case and draft of Rs100,000 was returned on the ground that no license fee is applicable in respect of license referred above. He said that he was asked that for revalidation, the petitioner may surrender original license.

He said that it was malafidely done to prolong the matter and delay in issuance of license so that he may not be able to run his business or to operate cable TV network. In response to above notice, he submitted a reply on February 20,2009, requesting that in terms of sub class No 2.4 and 2.5, they are prepared to pay late fee surcharge and send demand draft for renewal. He said that ten days have passed but there is no response from the respondent.

He said that on March 3, he contacted Pemra for issuance of lB-3 license but they refused and demanded payment of Rs600,000 as charges of license for category B-8, otherwise they would not renew license for category B-3. He said that he was issued B-8 license without consent and an amount of Rs350,000 was recovered under pressure. The respondent then issued B-3 category to him, therefore, they were requested to reconsider the matter and renew license for category B-3 and convert the license from B-8 to B-3 because the petitioner's network and Varda TV communication are one and same thing.

He said that he was operating cable TV network under valid license since 2004 and their license have always been renewed without any difficulty. He said that according to section 24(4) of Ordinance XIII of 2002, the license shall be valid for 5 to 15 years subject to payment of annual fee prescribed from time to time. The terms and conditions of license were complied with by him and he did not indulge in unfair business practice.

He prayed the court to declare that action of respondents for not renewing and issuing of license for category B3 for 2009 is illegal, void and against provisions of Pemra Ordinance 2002 and Rules made there-under.

He said that the respondent should issue license B-3 category to him for 2009 and onwards subject to payment of annual fees prescribed by respondent.

He requested that the respondent should be restrained from interfering and taking adverse action against petitioner with the establishment, maintenance and operation of satellite cable television transmission system.