Regulatory authority

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.    

Yes, the individual can challenge TRAI's decision in a higher court, arguing that the rejection was biased and exceeded its jurisdiction. Quasi-judicial authorities like TRAI have powers to: 1. _Interpret regulations_: TRAI can interpret regulations and make decisions based on its understanding. 2. _Conduct inquiries_: TRAI can conduct inquiries and investigations to gather facts. 3. _Issue directions_: TRAI can issue directions to service providers or other stakeholders. 4. _Impose penalties_: TRAI can impose penalties for non-compliance. However, quasi-judicial bodies like TRAI have limitations: 1. _Jurisdictional limitations_: TRAI can only act within its designated jurisdiction. 2. _Procedural fairness_: TRAI must follow principles of natural justice and provide a fair hearing. 3. _Reasoned decisions_: TRAI must provide reasoned decisions, explaining the basis for its conclusions. 4. _Appealability_: Decisions of TRAI can be appealed to a higher court or tribunal. If the individual challenging TRAI's decision can demonstrate that TRAI: 1. _Exceeded its jurisdiction_ 2. _Acted with bias_ 3. _Violated procedural fairness_ 4. _Failed to provide a reasoned decision_ They may have grounds for a successful challenge in a higher court. However, the court will examine the case on its merits, considering the evidence and arguments presented.