Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV NARULA
Telecom Regulatory Authority Of India – Appellant
Versus
Akshay Kumar Malhotra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
1. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India/ TRAI, challenges the order dated 06th June, 2024 [“impugned order”] issued by the Central Information Commission. [“CIC”] The controversy stems from three RTI applications filed by the Respondent seeking information regarding complaints he lodged with his Telecom Service Provider [“TSP”] Vodafone. By the impugned order, the CIC has directed TRAI to requisition information from Vodafone pertaining to the Respondent’s complaints and provide the same to the Respondent under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. [“RTI Act”] The Petitioner argues that this directive misconstrues the regulatory framework established under the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 [“TRAI Act”] and wrongly expands the scope of TRAI’s powers, rendering the order legally unsustainable.
Factual Background
2. The factual background leading to the initiation of the present proceedings is as follows:
2.1 The Respondent, Mr. Akshay Kumar Malhotra, registered his mobile number under the ‘Fully Blocked Category’ of the National Consumer Register for the National Do Not Call Registry. Despite requesting activation of the
TRAI is not obligated to requisition information from TSPs regarding individual complaints, as its authority is limited to regulatory functions under the TRAI Act.
The Information Commission must inquire into complaints regarding misleading information under the RTI Act, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
