tl;dr
In 2020, the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (“J&K”) issued several orders slowing down internet speed to 2G from 4G. Subsequently, the Union Territory frequently suspended the internet, without complying with directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020). With legal assistance from Internet Freedom Foundation (“IFF”), the Private School Association of J&K (Association), an association of over 3800 schools, approached the Supreme Court to challenge these orders, highlighting how the frequent suspension of internet services affects the right to education of students.
Why should you care?
Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020) affirmed that internet access is crucial for freedom of expression and cannot be indefinitely restricted, even in the name of national security. The pandemic highlighted the internet's essential role in education, with 2G restrictions severely hindering students' access to online classes. Although offline classes and 4G have resumed, frequent and arbitrary internet shutdowns continue to disrupt students' ability to submit assignments, access educational resources, and communicate with teachers and parents.
Background
The case arises from extended internet restrictions in J&K following the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India on 05.08.2019, which led to more than 500 days of restricted internet access. Despite Supreme Court rulings in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) and Foundation for Media Professionals v. U.T. of J&K (2020), which mandated that the internet restrictions be limited and proportionate, the Government of J&K continued to impose broad and indiscriminate restrictions. Additionally, the mobile internet speed continued being slowed down to 2G which was hopelessly outdated and inadequate in this day and age.
In Foundation for Media Professionals v. U.T. of J&K (2020), the Supreme Court established a Special Committee headed by the Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs to examine the necessity and proportionality of the internet restrictions in Jammu & Kashmir. However, since there was no information available in the public domain about the functioning of the Special Committee, a third round of litigation had to be initiated by the Foundation for Media Professionals seeking compliance with the Supreme Court's judgement. During the course of hearings in this Contempt Petition, the government revealed that the Special Committee had deliberated upon the issue and recommended staggered restoration of 4G mobile internet in low risk areas starting with one district in Jammu Division and Kashmir Division each. Subsequently, on 16.08.2020, the J&K government partially restored 4G internet in Ganderbal and Udhampur, while 18 districts remained restricted to 2G, hindering students' access to online learning.
On 25 December 2020, the Private School Association of J&K, an association of over 3800 schools in Jammu & Kashmir approached the Supreme Court through Writ Petition (Civil) No. 63 of 2021.The Petition challenged the J&K Government’s Order No. Home-134 (TSTS) dated 11.12.2020, and subsequent orders, as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21, and 21A of the Indian Constitution. Although 4G was fully restored by 05.02.2021, the government issued 134 internet suspension orders between 2021 and 2023, violating Supreme Court guidelines and continuing to impact fundamental rights.
The Association in its Petition argued that:
- Internet restriction orders violate the law: Union Territory of J&K has suspended internet services without publishing orders despite express direction from the Supreme Court to do so in Anuradha Bhasin. Moreover, the Union Territory of J&K has never published orders of the review committee, which must record its opinion on the legality of internet shutdown orders. This is again in violation of directions in Anuradha Bhasin.
- Internet restriction orders are not suitable to attain better law and order outcomes: The Union Territory of J&K purportedly suspends internet services to address security concerns. The Association has pointed out that research has shown that shutdowns incentivise violent collective actions, which require less coordination than peaceful demonstrations. Moreover, the internet is an agnostic medium which could be used to spread misinformation but also could be used to debunk rumours and provide truthful information.
- Restriction on internet services violates the Right to Education: During and since the pandemic, the internet has become necessary to access education. Articles 21 and 21A guarantees the right to education. However, frequent suspension of internet services either entirely prohibits the students from exercising their right to education or imposes severe restrictions on it.
Our persistent efforts
Despite the lengthy delays, the Petition was first listed on 17.10.2022, when notices were issued to the Respondents. Subsequent hearings, including one on 17.10.2022 and 18.11.2022, which resulted in orders for filing replies, and procedural steps such as the appearance of various counsels and filing of counter-affidavits followed.
On 28.10.2023, the petitioner filed an application to submit additional documents, detailing the continued issuance of internet suspension orders across Jammu & Kashmir despite the Supreme Court's earlier directions in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India. Between 2021 and 2023, 134 internet suspension orders were issued, infringing upon fundamental rights, particularly the right to education, by severely disrupting online learning and other essential services. Despite the lengthy delays and the petitioner’s sustained legal efforts, which included fighting the issue for over four years, the Supreme Court, on 02.01.2025, unfortunately dismissed the Writ Petition as infructuous on the ground that the orders challenged were no longer in effect. The Court acknowledged that the evolving situation in Jammu & Kashmir has made the original relief sought irrelevant. However, it emphasized that the dismissal was not on the merits of the case and left open the possibility for future legal remedies should new or similar issues arise. We are deeply grateful to the Private School Association of J&K for placing their trust in us and providing us an opportunity to represent them.
We are immensely grateful to Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat for leading us in the matter. He was assisted by the IFF’s Legal Team comprising Advocates Apar Gupta, Gautam Bhatia, Vrinda Bhandari, Abhinav Sekhri, Tanmay Singh, Krishnesh Bapat, Gayatri Malhotra, Naman Kumar, Injila Muslim Zaidi, and Shravani Nag Lanka.
In the course of these proceedings, IFF played a crucial role in challenging the internet shutdowns, working tirelessly to bring attention to this issue over the last four years. It was a disappointing outcome but IFF will continue in advocating for the protection of fundamental rights. While the case has now become infructuous due to the prolonged timeline, it serves as a reminder that the fight against internet shutdowns is far from over. Over the past 5 years, IFF has represented clients including the Foundation for Media Professionals and the Indian Journalists Union challenging internet Shutdowns in J&K before the Supreme Court. Our fundamental rights are inextricably linked with digital technologies and IFF commits to protecting them in an effective manner to advance our constitutional values of individual liberty, social justice and human welfare.