Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997

36 judgments · newest first · showing 1–36

PRAGYA PRASUN & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 599Disposed off

The petitioners, including acid‑attack survivors with facial disfigurements and a blind individual, challenged the mandatory digital KYC/e‑KYC/video‑KYC procedures for being inaccessible and discriminatory. They argued that requirements such as capturing a live photograph and performing a liveness …

C.I.T., DELHIversusBHARTI HEXACOM LTD.

2023 INSC 917Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Bharti Hexacom Ltd. and other telecom operators who paid a variable annual licence fee to the Department of Telecommunications under the New Telecom Policy of 1999. The issue was whether these payments were capital in nature, requiring amortisation under Section 35ABB of the …

LOOP TELECOM AND TRADING LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2022 INSC 255Dismissed

Loop Telecom applied for Unified Access Service Licences (UASL) for 2G spectrum and paid a non‑refundable entry fee of Rs 1454.94 crore. The Supreme Court, in Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India (CPIL), quashed the 2G licences on the ground that the First‑Come‑First‑Serve policy …

STAR INDIA (P) LTD.versusSOCIETY OF CATALYSTS & ANR.

2020 INSC 81Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Star India (P) Ltd and Bharti Airtel Ltd, who jointly conducted the 'Har Seat Hot Seat' (HSHS) contest on the TV programme KBC, engaged in an unfair trade practice under Section 2(1)(r)(3)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by allegedly funding the prize money …

MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.versusTATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD.

2019 INSC 286Dismissed

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL) entered into a purchase order with Tata Communications Ltd. for last‑mile connectivity, the contract stipulating that liquidated damages for delay could not exceed 12% of the contract value. Tata billed MTNL Rs 2,15,25,512 for services rendered, but MTNL …

COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusBHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 1154Leave granted

Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd (RJIL) filed an information under the Competition Act, 2002 alleging that the three incumbent dominant operators (Bharti Airtel, Vodafone India and Idea Cellular) and the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) colluded to deny or delay augmentation of Point of …

NATIONAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORY LTD.versusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2017 INSC 206Disposed off

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued an administrative circular under Section 11(1) of the SEBI Act to curb dematerialisation charges. National Securities Depository Ltd. (NSDL) challenged the circular, arguing that it could not be appealed before the Securities Appellate …

RELIANCE TELECOM LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2017 INSC 1254Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the 2015 Notice Inviting Application (NIA) for spectrum auction, where petitioners alleged that the minimum bidding requirements, classification of bidders and spectrum‑capping provisions violated Article 14 and created a non‑competitive environment. The …

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITEDversusVODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED

2016 INSC 906Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined multiple appeals filed by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL) against Vodafone Essar Gujarat Ltd., Bharti Airtel Ltd., and Tata Teleservices Ltd. concerning demands for interconnect usage charges on calls that allegedly lacked authentic Caller Line Identification (CLI). BSNL …

CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 300Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition challenging the Government's decision to allow migration of Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) spectrum to a Unified License (UL) and the imposition of a Rs 1,658 crore migration fee and a 1% spectrum usage charge (SUC) on Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. The …

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.versusPAWAN KUMAR GUPTA

2015 INSC 665Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL), a statutory corporation that had acquired the assets and liabilities of the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), could invoke Article 112 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which grants a thirty‑year limitation period for suits by the …

BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 418Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals and writ petitions filed by Bharti Airtel Ltd and other telecom operators seeking renewal or extension of their licences granted under Section 4 of the Telegraph Act, 1885. The operators argued that the licences created a contractual right to extension and that …

ASSOCIATION OF UNIFIED TELE SERVICES PROVIDERS & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA

2014 INSC 294Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) could audit the accounts of private telecom service providers under the Unified Access Services (UAS) licences to verify revenue sharing with the Union. Service providers argued that the CAG’s powers under Article …

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITEDversusTELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 808Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) could entertain challenges to regulations made by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) under Section 36 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997. It held that the power …

RE: SPECIAL REFERENCE N0.1 OF 2012versus--

2012 INSC 428Reference answered

The President of India made a reference under Article 143(1) of the Constitution seeking the Supreme Court's opinion on whether auction is the only permissible method for disposal of all natural resources, following the Court's judgment in the 2G case which had quashed spectrum licenses and directed …

SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusA. RAJA

2012 INSC 352Rejected

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a criminal complaint alleging that former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram conspired with Telecom Minister A. Raja in the 2G spectrum scam, seeking to make Chidambaram an accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Special Judge, after examining the material, found …

AVISHEK GOENKAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2012 INSC 188Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, led by Avishek Goenka, raised a public‑interest writ alleging that prepaid SIM cards were being sold without proper identity verification, posing security risks and violating Department of Telecommunications (DoT) notifications. The petitioner sought strict enforcement of …

CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 68Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the allocation of 2G spectrum licences by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) between September 2007 and March 2008, which were based on Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) recommendations to use the 2001 entry fee and a first‑come‑first‑served policy. …

BHARTI CELLULAR LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 674Dismissed

Bharti Cellular Ltd, holder of a licence to provide cellular services in the Delhi Metro area, challenged the computation of licence fees, interest, penal interest and the unit call rate applied by the Union of India. The dispute arose from the date of commencement of the licence, the method of …

SHYAM TELELINK LTD. NOW SISTEMA SHYAM TELESERVICES LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA

2010 INSC 675Dismissed

Shyam Telelink Ltd. was granted a basic telecom licence in 1998 with a requirement to commence commercial operations within twelve months. Due to technical deficiencies, permission to start operations was denied, and the Union of India offered a Migration Package in July 1999, which the company …

JAMES JOSEPHversusSTATE OF KERALA

2010 INSC 564Dismissed

The State of Kerala issued a notification to declare certain lands as revenue forest, which the appellant's predecessor claimed title to. The Forest Settlement Officer rejected the claim, but the Additional District Judge allowed it on appeal under Section 11 of the Kerala Forest Act. The State …

RELIANCE INFOCOMM LTDversusBHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. & ORS.

2008 INSC 557Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined Reliance Infocomm Ltd.'s challenge to BSNL's demand for Access Deficit Charges (ADC) on its "Unlimited Cordless" service, arguing that the service should be classified as Fixed Wireless Local Loop (WLL(F)) and thus exempt from ADC. The Court considered the definitions in …

TATA TELESERVICES LTD.versusBHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. AND ORS.

2008 INSC 562Dismissed

BSNL demanded Access Deficit Charges (ADC) from Tata Teleservices for its 'Walky' service for the period 14‑Nov‑2004 to 26‑Aug‑2005, alleging that the service should be classified as Wireless Local Loop Mobile (WLL(M)) and thus liable to ADC. Tata contended that 'Walky' was a fixed wireless (WLL(F)) …

UNION OF INDIAversusTATA TELESERVICES (MAHARASHTRA) LTD.

2007 INSC 857Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India invited tenders for a telecom licence and, after receiving a tender, issued a Letter of Intent to Tata Teleservices, which later failed to fulfil its obligations. The Union claimed damages of Rs 50 crore and set‑off the amount, while Tata claimed Rs 654.25 crore for breach of …

HOTEL & RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION AND ANR.versusSTAR INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ORS

2006 INSC 911Appeal(s) allowed

The Hotel & Restaurant Associations, representing owners of large and small hotels, challenged the rates demanded by broadcasters under TRAI's tariff orders, arguing that they are consumers entitled to TDSAT's jurisdiction under Section 14 of the TRAI Act. TDSAT held that the hotels were not …

UNION OF INDIAversusMIS. MILLENIUM MUMBAI BROADCAST PVT. LTD.

2006 INSC 269Dismissed

The Union of India granted FM broadcasting licences to ten operators, including Millenium Mumbai Broadcast Ltd., with a requirement to co‑locate transmission facilities. Five operators defaulted, leading the licensor to allow the remaining five to use interim facilities and later require them to pay …

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 133Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the provision of telephone services by telecom operators constitutes a sale of goods, a service, or a composite contract of both, and consequently whether State governments can levy sales tax under Entry 54 of List II. The petitioners argued that the transaction is …

BHARTI TELENET LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 173Appeal(s) allowed

Bharti Telenet Ltd., a basic telephone service licensee in Madhya Pradesh, disputed the interconnection points with BSNL and sought a TRAI order on 15 June 2001, which was declared of general applicability. The company asked its industry association (ABTO) to file a collective review, which was …

CELLULAR OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 542Appeal(s) allowed

The Cellular Operators Association of India (appellants) challenged the Government's decision to permit Fixed Service Providers to offer Wireless in Local Loop (WLL) with limited mobility, arguing that the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) failed to consider the …