JUDGMENT :

[Prathiba M. Singh, J.]

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner - Royal Digital Cable and Communication Pvt. Ltd. seeking setting aside of the impugned orders dated 17th November, 2022 and 22nd December 2022 passed by the ld. Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (TDSAT).

3. The Petitioner is a Multi-System Operator (MSO) offering its services in Burhanpur, Madhya Pradesh. It is engaged in the business of providing cable television services by way of supplying signals of Free-to-Air as well as Pay Channels including supply of programmes, packages etc. to cable operators including the channels of the Respondent No.1 - Star India Pvt. Ltd.

4. It is the case of the Petitioner that on 23rd October, 2020 an audit report was generated by an empanelled auditor, under regulation 15(1) of the Telecommunication (broadcasting and cable) Services Interconnection (addressable systems) Regulations, 2017 (hereinafter, “TRAI Regulations, 2017”). The said report was shared with the Respondent No.1. As per the said report, the Petitioner’s system was found to be compliant with the TRAI Regulations, 2017. However, Respondent No.1 was not satisfied with the same and it appointed another empanelled auditor, namely, M/s Borkar and Mazumdar who issued and shared the audit report under regulation 15(2) of the TRAI Regulations, 2017 on 31st May, 2021 (hereinafter, “second audit report”).

5. The second audit report generated by the empanelled auditor was disputed by the Petitioner. On the basis of the second audit report, a demand letter for additional license fee from the Petitioner was raised by the Respondent No.1. The said demand letter was challenged by the Petitioner before the TDSAT in Petition No. 471/2021. The said matter was pending before the TDSAT and on 11th March, 2022, an interim order was passed holding that the matter would require final hearing. The said interim order came to be challenged by the Respondent No.1 in W.P.(C) 6681/2022 titled Star India Pvt. Ltd. v. Royal Digital Cable Communication Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. when the matter was remanded back to the TDSAT.

6. Thereafter, an application was filed by the Respondent No.1 before TDSAT taking the position that it is entitled to disconnect the signals of the Petitioner. On the said application, vide order dated 17th November, 2022, the TDSAT observed as under:

“14. Thus, prima facie it appears that original petitioner has not complied with requirements of schedule - Ill appended with the Interconnection Regulations, 2017 and looking to the audit report prima facie, there is an additional system available with the original petitioner which is not revealed to the broadcaster who is the applicant of this M.A. and respondent in the main broadcasting petition. The quantum of the discrepancy which is to be converted into the amount to be deposited by the original petitioner to the original respondent shall be decided at the time of final hearing. But prima facie it appears that there is non-compliance of requirements of Schedule Ill of the Interconnection Regulations, 2017 by the original petitioner.

15. Much has been argued out by the counsel appearing for the original petitioner that audit report under Regulation 15(1) is also reliable audit report and evidence upon which the auditor while carrying out audit under Regulation 15(2) has relied upon were, in fact, not collected and verified in presence of the original petitioner. There is no need to consult first the petitioner and thereafter to collect the evidence by the broadcaster. Evidence of the broadcaster can be collected by the broadcaster on its own. The evaluation of this evidence depends upon the auditor's report. It ought to be kept in mind that the audit has been chosen from the empaneled auditors. This empanelment was done by TRAI and, therefore, prima facie we have no reason to arrive at any other conclusion than what is mentio