Delhi High Court - Orders
One97 Communications Limited And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 22 September, 2020
Author: Prateek Jalan
Bench: Chief Justice, Prateek Jalan
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3330/2020 & CM APPL. 11699/2020
ONE97 COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITED AND ANR ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Dushyant Dave, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Neha Sangwan &
Ms.Ruchira Goel, Advocates for Petitioner
No.1.
Ms. Karuna Nundy, Ms.Ragini Nagpal,
Advocates for Petitioner no. 2.
Mr. Ashim Sood & Ms. Senu Nizar, Advocates
for Intervenor/IAMAI.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with
Mr.Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC, Mr.Abhigyan
Siddhant, Mr.Anish Roy, Mr.Sahaj Garg,
Mr.R.V. Prabhat & Mr.Amit Gupta, Advocates
for R-1/UOI.
Mr. Arjun Natarajan with Mr.N.Sasank Iyer,
Advocates for R-2/TRAI.
Mr. Nalin Kohli, Mr.Tejveer Bhatia &
Ms.Vishakha Ahuja, Advocates for R-3/BSNL.
Ms. Shikha Sarin, Advocate for R-4 & R-9.
Ms. Anuradha Dutt, Ms.Fereste Sethna,
Mr.Anish Kapur, Ms.Suman Yadav &
Ms.Nikhita Suri, Advocates for R-5.
Mr. Harsh Kaushik, Mr.Abhay Chattopadhyay,
Ms.Nikita Chitale, Advocates for R-6/Bharti
Airtel Limited.
Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate with
Mr.K.R. Sasiprabhu, Mr.Hiten Sampat,
Mr.Raghav Shankar, Mr.Vishnu Sharma,
W.P.(C) 3330/2020 Page 1 of 3
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:23.09.2020
16:51:40
Mr.Sanjeevi Sesadri & Mr.Tushar Bhardwaj,
Advocates for R-7/Reliance Jio Infocom Ltd.
Mr. Anjan Chakraborty & Mr.Akshay Kapoor,
Advocates for R-8/MTNL.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ORDER
% 22.09.2020 The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. This case concerns the question of implementation of the Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as 'the TCCCPR 2018 Regulations'). Having heard learned counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are informed that since long, notices have been issued by Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as 'TRAI') for non-compliance of the TCCCPR 2018 Regulations, but not a single show cause notice has been finally adjudicated upon.
2. Learned counsel for TRAI has argued out the case at length and taken this Court to various definitions provided in the TCCCPR 2018 Regulations. However, all these provisions are of no use if no final decision is taken by TRAI after issuing the show cause notices.
3. We expect from TRAI that at least one or two show cause notices will be finally adjudicated before the next date of hearing.
4. Learned counsel for TRAI is seeking four weeks' time to take W.P.(C) 3330/2020 Page 2 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ KUMAR Location: Signing Date:23.09.2020 16:51:40 action in accordance with law against entities/telecom service providers which are not registered or to whom the show cause notices have been issued. We are giving 8 weeks' time to TRAI for the said purpose and the progress shall be pointed out by TRAI on the next date of hearing.
5. It is made clear that TRAI is free to adjudicate the show cause notices issued by it in accordance with law, and take such decision as it thinks is appropriate. We have not given any direction except that the adjudication should be completed.
6. Additional affidavits shall be filed by respondent No.2/TRAI before the next date of hearing. TRAI is also directed to bring the additional affidavits already filed, on record.
7. List on 25.11.2020.
CHIEF JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 ns W.P.(C) 3330/2020 Page 3 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ KUMAR Location: Signing Date:23.09.2020 16:51:40