Digital news platform Newslaundry approached the Delhi High Court on Friday against the Central government's order to take down videos and content about businessman Gautam Adani’s Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL) 

Justice Sachin Datta was scheduled to hear the matter but he rose early owing to some prior engagements.

The case is now likely to be heard on September 22.

In a communication issued on September 16, the Central government ordered Newslaundry to "take appropriate action" in compliance with the trial court order of September 6, for the removal of defamatory content against Adani.

Newslaundry has argued that its reporting does not contain anything defamatory about Adani and that the Central government has gone over and above the trial court's directions.

"The Respondent [Central government] has gone over and above the directions of the Ld Trial Court, by requiring the Petitioner and other recipients of the Impugned Order to remove all and every video/publication/ reporting undertaken wrt to the plaintiff [Adani Enterprises Limited], without going into the aspect that the said video/publication/ reporting could be a simple reporting on facts/ current affairs in exercise of their journalistic duties," Newslaundry's plea said.

According to the petitionadani, the government's takedown order was passed to protect the interests of a private party.

"It is evident that the Respondent on its own accord and/or with the intent of protection of private interests, and in grave violation of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, directed necessary action by the Petitioner which is nothing short of an arbitrary overreach of the powers vested with the Respondent under the present statutory/ constitutional regime as discussed in the present Petition," the news platform argued.

Further, it stated that the government has ordered a blanket ban on reporting anything against Adani.

As per the plea,

"The Impugned Order [of Central government] is nothing short of complete administrative overreach and inherently arbitrary exercise of executive power by the Respondent in directing action on the basis of an order passed in a civil dispute between private parties. The Impugned Order has no legal, statutory and/or constitutional basis in the first place. The government cannot seek compliance of court orders in complete violation of the principles of separation of powers."

Newslaundry's plea was filed through advocate Uddhav Khanna and Dhruva Vig.