Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ, AMIT BORKAR, J.
Amit Vyas - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India - Respondent
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 89 OF 2024
Decided On : 10-01-2025
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Public Interest Litigation - Writ of mandamus sought to address online ticketing scams and black marketing - Petitioner alleges irregularities in ticket sales for a concert, seeking regulatory measures and an expert committee - Court emphasizes separation of powers, stating it cannot compel legislative action or direct the creation of laws. (Paras 18, 28, 55)
(B) Fundamental Rights - Articles 14, 15(2), 19, and 21 - Allegations of ticket scalping and black marketing do not constitute violations of fundamental rights as they primarily involve private entities without state action - Court clarifies that private conduct does not fall under the ambit of Articles 14 and 15(2). (Paras 31, 32, 35)
(C) Judicial Review - Court cannot engage in speculative inquiries or compel legislative or executive action - The responsibility for addressing the issues raised lies with the legislature and executive, not the judiciary. (Paras 48, 55)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a practicing Advocate, filed a PIL alleging scams in the online ticketing for the Coldplay concert, claiming significant irregularities and seeking regulatory intervention.
Findings of Court:
The Court found no merit in the petitioner's claims, emphasizing the separation of powers and the absence of a statutory framework for the relief sought.
Issues: The main issues were whether the court could compel legislative action and whether the alleged practices violated fundamental rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that it cannot direct the legislature to enact specific laws and that private ticket scalping does not infringe upon fundamental rights without state involvement.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
(PER AMIT BORKAR, J.)
1. The petitioner, invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 to 3 to take cognizance of online ticketing scams and black marketing, and to frame effective and comprehensive laws, rules, and regulations to prevent the practices of ticket scalping, touting, and black marketing concerning the sale of tickets for ‘major events’. The petitioner further prays for the constitution of an expert committee to study and recommend measures to control and regulate the online sale of tickets for such events.
2. The petitioner specifically draws attention to substantial irregularities and illegalities alleged to have occurred in the online sale of tickets conducted on 22nd September 2024 for the concert “COLDPLAY: Music of the Spheres World Tour”, scheduled for January 2025. Based on these allegations, the petitioner seeks directions for reconvening the online sale of tickets, if necessary.
3. The petitioner is a practicing Advocate and claims locus standi by invoking the doctrine of public interest litigation to bring to light grievances impacting a large section of the public. Respondent Nos.5 and 6 are companies incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. Respondent No.4 is a globally renowned live entertainment company responsible for organizing and hosting international concerts. Respondent No. 6 is a group company of respondent No.5 and acts as a liaison for promoting live entertainment events in India. The petitioner alleges that an online ticketing scam pertaining to the “COLDPLAY: Music of the Spheres World Tour” Concert 2025, necessitated the filing of the present PIL petition. It is alleged that respondent No. 4, as the global ticketing partner for the Coldplay tour, collaborated with respondent Nos. 5 and 6 and awarded exclusive ticketing rights to "BookMyShow" for the Indian leg of the tour.
4. The petitioner contends that tickets for the concert were announced to be live for booking on 22nd September 2024 at 12:00 p.m. via BookMyShow’s digital platform. However, according to the petitioner, the process was marred by multi- crore irregularities. It is alleged that even before the scheduled time of 12:00 p.m., numerous users, including the petitioner, were logged out from the platform. Subsequently, both the application (App) and the website became non- responsive, precluding users from accessing the platform to purchase tickets. When users were able to log in by 12:16 p.m., they were placed in a digital queue where the initial two shows of the concert, scheduled for 18th and 19th January 2025, were shown as "sold out" within minutes, at approximately 12:30 p.m. Further, at around 1:30 p.m., a third show of the concert, scheduled for 21st January 2025, was announced and tickets were made available for purchase. However, these tickets were also shown as "sold out" almost instantaneously, even as the queue numbers for many users remained stagnant.
5. The petitioner contends that within minutes of 12:00 noon on 22nd September 2024, tickets for the concert were made available on secondary ticketing websites (STWs) such as Viagogo.com through ticket scalpers, who procured large quantities of tickets and resold them at exorbitant prices. The petitioner alleges that the original price of a ticket on the BookMyShow platform was Rs.2,500, but in the secondary market, the starting price ranged from Rs.25,000 to Rs.12,00,000 or more. It is argued that such an extraordinary escalation in ticket prices could not have occurred without the active involvement, connivance, or gross negligence of promoters, directors, and key managerial personnel of respondent Nos.4 to 6. The petitioner submits that these actions demonstrate a blatant failure of the regulatory framework, warranting judicial scrutiny and remedial measures.
6. The petitioner further states that on 23rd September 2024, a police complaint was filed with the Economic
The court cannot compel legislative action or direct the creation of laws regarding online ticketing scams, as such matters fall within the exclusive domain of the legislature.
The prohibition on convenience fees for online tickets by government orders violates Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, lacking statutory authority under the Maharashtra Entertainment Duty Act.
(1) Purchaser of a lottery ticket is a potential user and a service is being made available by selling agents in context of Competition Act, 2002.(2) Inclusive mentioning does not inhibit larger expa....
State-sponsored events necessitate lawful proceedings and appropriate oversight in inquiry to preserve public confidence and accountability.
(1) Right recognized in Article 19(1)(g) is not an unfettered right and State may impose reasonable restrictions on exercise of that right, in terms of Article 19(6) – Trade and business of operating....
The unauthorized sale of e-tickets through online platforms is prohibited under Section 143 of the Railways Act, covering both physical and online ticket sales.
Digital intermediaries are statutorily exempt from liability for third-party content. They are not required to adjudicate the veracity or defamatory nature of online publications until presented with....
A proceeding under Article 131 cannot be likened to a civil suit under CPC; it requires a liberal interpretation based on whether a legal right is at stake.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
