Supreme Court directs Airtel, Vodafone to Disclose details about 'Segmented Offers'  to TRAI [Read Order]

On 6^th Nov 2020, the Supreme Court of India in the case of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India v. M/S Bharti Ltd and Ors. comprising of three-Judge Bench Justice S.A. Bobde, Justice A.S. Bopanna And Justice V. Ramasubramahanian directs Bharti Airtel, Vodafone to disclose details about segmented Offers to Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.  

TRAI issued an order namely the Telecommunication Tariff (63^rd Amendment)Order. Challenging the said Tariff order, Bharti Airtel Limited, Idea Cellular Limited, and Vodafone Mobile Services Milited filed appeals in Telecom before the TDSAT. Primarily, the challenge was to the Reporting Requirements and Significant Market Power. The telecom service providers sought an interim stay of the Tariff Order. The service providers were exempted from disclosing the names of their customers and other sensitive information.

Challenging the interim arrangement so issued by TDSAT, TRI filed writ petitions before the High Court of Delhi. The writ petitions were dismissed, with a request to the tribunal to dispose of the appeals as expeditiously as possible. TDSAT heard the appeals finally and allowed them partially by a final order. The TDSAT set aside the Telecom Tariff 63^rd Amendment Order in so far as it changes the concepts of SMP, Non-predation, and the related provisions

The appellant (TRAI) has filed an application for seeking interim directions to the service providers to disclose information/details sought by the appellant regarding the segmented offers.

The respondent contended before the Court that whenever the applicant- TRAI wanted to call for details of segmented offers about which TRAI received complaints, the respondents are ready and willing to furnish the same. It is contended by the respondent that the TRAI cannot seek such interim directions, after having failed to secure a stay of the operation of the impugned order.

The Court in its analysis stated that the argument of the respondents that the prayer for stay of operation of the impugned order was granted only to a limited extent, at the time when the appeals were admitted, does not take the respondents anywhere.

The Court in its judgment stated that what is now sought by TRAI to ensure adherence to the regulatory principles of transparency, non-discrimination and non-predation cannot be said, at least prima facie to be either illegal or wholly unjustified. Hence, The direction is issued to the respondents to disclose information/details sought by the applicant regarding segment offers.

Read Order @Latestlaws.com