Back
2014 Supreme(Online)(TDSAT) 30
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT AND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Aftab Alam, CJ, Kuldip Singh, J
M/s Reliance Communications Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Petition No.48 of 2012 | Petition No.132 of 2012 | Petition No.133 of 2012 | Petition No.388 of 2012 | Petition No.389 of 2012
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Navin Chawla, Mr. Ninad Dogra
For the Respondents: Mr. K.P.S. Kohli, Ms. Neha Singh, Mr. Prashant Jain, Ms. Maneesha Dhir
Telecom service providers must ensure subscriber verification compliance; penalties are unjust without evidence of non-compliance due to external restraints.
Headnote:(A) Telecom Regulatory Framework - Unified Access Services License (UASL) Agreement - Clause 41.14 - The petitioners challenged financial penalties imposed by the Union of India for non-compliance with subscriber verification requirements. Clause 41.14 mandates subscriber identity verification for national security. (Para 1, 3, 5)
(B) Non-compliance Defense - The petitioners argued the inability to provide Customer Acquisition Forms (CAFs) due to a warehouse dispute and an injunction, constituting force majeure. (Paras 6-12)
(C) Findings of Court - The Tribunal accepted that without a rigid checking timeline and in light of compliance efforts, penalties were unjustified, providing for re-audit of submitted documents. (Paras 17)
(D) Result - Penalties imposed by the respondent were quashed, allowing scrutiny of submitted CAFs for future compliance. (Result)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to penalty for license agreement violation. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. requirements for subscriber verification under uas license. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. dot's procedures and penalties for non-compliance. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. petitioners' inability to produce required documents due to external legal issues. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. petitioners showed efforts to comply despite legal restraints. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. responsibility of petitioners regarding compliance of the license terms. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 7. verification of compliance is essential for national security. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 8. imposition of penalties for non-compliance requires strict adherence to guidelines. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 9. decision to quash penalties imposed by the respondent. (Para 17) |
Judgment
Kuldip Singh:
In this batch of petitions, penalty imposed by the respondent – Union of India for violation of terms & conditions of license agreement with regard to verification of subscribers, has been challenged. Since the questions of law and facts involved are similar, all these petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The petitioners - M/s Reliance Communications Ltd. (Petition No. 48 of 2012, 132 of 2012 & 388 of 2012) and M/s. Reliance Telecom Ltd. (Petition No. 133 of 2012 and 389 of 2012) have been granted Unified Access Services License (UASL) under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act , 1885, for M.P. License Service Area.
3. As per clause 41.14 [Part VI] of the UAS License Agreement, licensees are required, inter-alia, to do the following:-
(i) make a complete list of their subscribers available on their website so that the authorized Intelligence Agencies can obtain the same at any time;
(ii) Ensure adequate verification of each and every customer before enrolling it as a subscriber;
(iii) Follow the instructions issued by the licensor in this regard from time to time. Clause 41.14 of the UAS Licences reads as under :-
“The complete list of subscribers shall be made available by the LICENSEE on their website (having password controlled access), so that authorized Intelligence Agencies are able to obtain the subscriber list at any time, as per their convenience with the help of the password. The list should be updated on regular basis. Hard copy as and when required by security agencies shall also be furnished. The LICENSEE shall ensure adequate verification of each and every customer before enrolling him as a subscriber; instructions issued by the licensor in this regard from time to time shall be scrupulously followed. The SIM Card used in the User terminal shall be registered against each subscriber for his bonafide use. The LICENSEE shall make it clear to the subscriber that the SIM Card used in the user terminal against him is non-transferable and that he alone will be responsible for proper and bonafide personal use of the service.”
On 31.7.2008, the UAS License was amended to incorporate the following clause :-
”The Licensor shall have the right to direct the Licensee to warn, penalize or terminate the franchisee or agent or distributor or servant, after considering any report of conduct or antecedents detrimental to the security of the nation. The decision of the Licensor in this regard shall be final and binding and in any case the Licensee shall bear all liabilities in the matter and keep the Licensor indemnified for all claims, cost, charges or damages in this respect.”
4. Clause 41.14 of the License Agreement is a part of security considerations. The objective of this clause is that the identity as well as address details of any subscriber subscribing to the services of the licensee company should be readily available in case of need. We may note that in case of a fixed phone service, the premises where the phone is installed is well known in contrast to mobile service where the subscriber can be anywhere. It is more so in case of prepaid service for which the phone bill is not required to be issued to the subscriber and the subscribe
