A Bench led by Chief Justice Suryakant, sitting with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, heard an early-listing request from Head Digital Works (HDW), operator of A23. The company warned that the sector is undergoing a severe shutdown despite PROGA not yet being formally notified. Senior advocates Aryama Sundaram and Arvind Datar told the court that the petition had unexpectedly vanished from the docket of the Bench that previously heard related state-level gaming appeals. They stressed that the plea challenges the constitutionality of central law itself.

The Chief Justice noted that cases concerning the “vires of a statute” are generally placed before a three-judge Bench. He said the entire batch of PROGA-related matters — including HDW’s plea — would “likely” be listed in January once the Bench is constituted. When counsel urged an earlier date due to the industry’s collapse, the Chief Justice responded: “Everything is shut down… We are listing in January. That is what I am promising.”

The dispute is closely linked to the already-argued Gameskraft batch, where another Bench has reserved judgment on whether states have the constitutional authority to regulate or prohibit online gaming. The PROGA challenge raises the corresponding question of whether Parliament can impose a nationwide ban. Petitioners argued the issues are intertwined, and that a ruling in one will inevitably affect the other.

HDW submitted that since PROGA’s publication on August 22, banks, payment gateways, and intermediaries have withdrawn services, effectively paralysing operations. The company said it has had no revenue for nearly three months while continuing to bear monthly operating expenses exceeding Rs100 million ($1.2 million). Its workforce has fallen from 606 to 178, and foreign investor Clairvest has written off its Rs7.6-billion ($91 million) investment. The industry is estimated to employ around 200,000 people nationwide.

In its affidavit, the Union government defended PROGA as a necessary regulatory measure to address risks posed by unregulated online money-gaming, including financial integrity concerns, opaque algorithms, and vulnerable users. It maintained that Parliament holds full legislative authority over the sector.

With the Supreme Court signalling a January hearing before a larger Bench, the future of India’s roughly Rs230-billion ($2.75-billion) online skill-gaming industry will hinge on a constitutional ruling early next year. Until then, the sector remains in a state of uncertainty.