The Supreme Court has rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking regulation of internet prices in India, emphasizing that consumers have multiple choices in the market. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar stated, “It’s a free market. There are several options. BSNL (Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited) and MTNL (Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited) are also giving you Internet.”
The petitioner, appearing in person, argued that despite various service providers, a significant portion of the market is controlled by Jio and Reliance, which allegedly results in a lack of competitive pricing. “They are providing services, but 80% of the market share is with Jio and Reliance,” the petitioner contended while advocating for standardized internet rates across providers.
However, the Supreme Court was not convinced by the argument. Addressing the petitioner’s concerns regarding potential monopolistic practices, CJI Khanna remarked, “If you are alleging cartelisation, then go to the Competition Commission of India.” The bench reiterated that existing legal mechanisms, such as the Competition Commission of India (CCI), are equipped to handle such claims.
The apex court dismissed the petition outright, making it clear that judicial intervention under Article 32 of the Constitution was not warranted in this matter. “We are not inclined to entertain the present petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, petition is dismissed. We, however, clarify that in case the petitioner wants to take any recourse to appropriate statutory remedy, he is at liberty to do so, we make no comments in this regard,” the bench stated in its order.
While dismissing the plea, the Supreme Court left the door open for the petitioner to explore alternative legal avenues. The court’s observations reaffirm the principle that price regulation in a competitive market is best handled by regulatory bodies rather than judicial intervention.
Picture Source :
