This judgment was by a Bench on a large number of appeals moved by state-run Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL), Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI), Tata Teleservices and Reliance Infocomm. Each was affected in various ways by the TDSAT orders involving regulations set by Trai.
Trai had, in July 2010, filed a petition to the court noting TDSAT was not authorised to hear an appeal against its regulations.
Trai gives regulations on issues like rates, inter-connection and quality of service.
The Trai Act was changed by an ordinance from January 24, 2000, establishing TDSAT to take over the adjudicatory and dispute functions. According to the Trai site, TDSAT was set up to adjudicate any dispute between a licensor and a licensee, between two or more service providers, between a service provider and a group of consumers, and to hear and dispose appeals against a direction, decision or order of Trai.
Trai had filed the petition before the Supreme Court in July 2010, following a TDSAT order asking the regulator to take a fresh look on the telecommunication interconnection (port charges) Amendment regulation 2007, in which Trai had reduced port charges by about 23-29 per cent on various slabs. TDSAT's order came based on a petition by state-run telecom service provider Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL) on the matter.
Earlier in 2006, Trai had filed a petition before the Delhi High Court, challenging an order by TDSAT in January 2005, in which the tribunal had said that it has jurisdiction to "examine the vires of a regulation".
Trai, in its petition requesting the Supreme Court to transfer a petition filed by it in the Delhi High Court in 2006, said: "TDSAT is authorised only to hear and dispose of appeal against any direction, decision or order of the petitioner (Trai) under the Trai Act, 1997, and there is no provision to hear appeal against regulations framed by Trai in the exercise of its power under section 36 of the Act."
Coai director general Rajan Mathews said that this might lead to a situation where settlements of disputes would take much more time. "There are many high courts and they may have multiple opinions. Even after that, these cases may go to the Supreme Court. TDSAT was a single-window solution for the telcos," he added.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)