| The issue involved is Trai's jurisdiction. The TDSAT order had restricted Trai's jurisdiction to interfering in agreements signed between telecom service providers. | |
| A Bench, headed by Justice HK Sema, heard Trai's complaint that the TDSAT order was causing great harm to consumers and telecom services. | |
| On April 27, the tribunal had ruled on a petition moved by state-run BSNL that Trai had no power to interfere with interconnectivity offers of telecom operators and the agreements signed between two operators on this issue. | |
| Trai argued that Section 11 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act gave it the power to "set terms and conditions of interconnectivity between service providers". It pointed out that dominant service providers could dictate terms to small service providers in the field of interconnections. | |
| BSNL, which had 80 per cent share in the market, did at one stage force such agreements and then withdrew them. Trai intervened to promote expeditious and effective interconnection, which was of vital importance to the telecom sector. The TDSAT ruling went against this. | |
| However, BSNL maintains that Trai does not have the power to prescribe terms and conditions set by the interconnectivity agreements of service providers. | |
| It can only make recommendations. In any case, Trai's power exists only for licences granted before the amended Act came into force in 2000. | |
|
| |
Top Section
Explore Business Standard