LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Ritu Pandey   08 September 2024

Regulatory authority

Shivam (my dad), a successful businessman with over 20 years of experience in the telecom industry, sought to expand his network into a new, underserved region in northern India. His company, known for its innovative services, applied for a telecom license to begin operations in this area, hoping to provide affordable and reliable mobile and internet services to the local population. The region has limited connectivity, and my dad’s business plan emphasized boosting digital access for small businesses and remote communities.

However, his application was rejected by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), a quasi-judicial authority responsible for regulating the telecom industry. TRAI cited a violation of specific terms, including incomplete documentation and non-compliance with certain regulatory requirements, such as frequency spectrum usage. He feels that the decision was made without thorough consideration, claiming that all necessary documents were provided, and that his company's past compliance record with telecom regulations is spotless. He also suspects that larger telecom companies may have influenced the decision to limit competition. 

Can he challenge the decision in a higher court, arguing that TRAI’s rejection was biased and exceeded its jurisdiction. What powers does a quasijudicial authority like TRAI have in such cases? What are the limitations on the actions of such quasijudicial bodies?



Learning

 2 Replies

Saloni Pande   08 September 2024

In the higher court this case can be challenged the following needs to be taken into consideration:

Make an appeal to the (TDSAT) Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal that is the body designated to handle disputes and appeal against the decisions made by TRAI as a first step. Rejection was biased and exceeded its jurisdiction is what can be argued by Mr. Shivam by the evidences of compliance present and any potential undue influence by larger telecom companies.    

Mr. Shivam can appeal further if he is not satisfied with the decision of the TDSAT to the High Court and subsequently to the Supreme Court of India.  Arguing that the TRAI’s decision lacked proper consideration, was arbitrary and violated principle of natural justice under which he can seek judicial review.  

TRAI has the authority to issue guidelines and regulation for the telecom sector, protect consumer interest, regulate tariffs and ensure technical compatibility.  The disputes between the service provides and the disputes between the service provider and the customers can be adjudicated, although the powers of TRAI is limited as compared to that of the TDSAT.  Recommendation of licensing terms and conditions can be recommended by the TRAI but the final decision lies with the DoT (Department of Telecommunication) as a quasi-judicial body these are the powers of the TRAI.

Most of the disputes and appeals are handled by the TDSAT as after its establishment in the 2000 the power of TRAI was significantly reduced. As per the TRAI’s jurisdiction it is only confined to telecom services and does not expand to broadcasting services.

Your dad can argue that the decision was influenced by the larger telecom companies to have a limited competition by presenting any evidence of undue influence or bias. Failure to follow the due process or improper consideration of submitted documents can be highlighted as a procedural lapses.    


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register