- News>
- States
Kerala HC stays Trai notification
Kochi, May 13: A division bench of the Kerala High Court today stayed for a month Telecom Regulatory Authority of India`s notification on January 24 revising basic telecom tariffs, which came into effect from May 1.
Kochi, May 13: A division bench of the Kerala High Court today stayed for a month Telecom Regulatory Authority of India's notification on January 24 revising basic telecom tariffs, which came into effect from May 1.
The stay order was passed by the bench, comprising Justice K Thankappan and Justice J M James, on two Public Interest Litigations filed by two MLAs-- Stephen George and P Narayanan, seeking quashing of the notification and to declare the recently revised tariffs as "unconstitutional."
When the petitions came up before the bench they stayed the notification and observed that ultimately if the PILs are dismissed, the amount as per the present tariff can be recovered.
The petitioners claimed that supreme court had declared that the use of telephone and such other devices of communication was part of fundamental right guaranteed to the citizen under the Constitution (Right of Expression guaranteed under Art 19 (1) (a) which includes freedom to propagate ideas to public to benefit them).
By introducing an 'excessive' and 'disproportionate' tariff, BSNL had clearly 'infracted' the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, the petitioners stated.
The 'unreasonable' rates, introduced with the 'malafide' motive of supporting mobile cell operators in the private sector, was violative of the constitution, they submitted.
Bureau Report
When the petitions came up before the bench they stayed the notification and observed that ultimately if the PILs are dismissed, the amount as per the present tariff can be recovered.
The petitioners claimed that supreme court had declared that the use of telephone and such other devices of communication was part of fundamental right guaranteed to the citizen under the Constitution (Right of Expression guaranteed under Art 19 (1) (a) which includes freedom to propagate ideas to public to benefit them).
By introducing an 'excessive' and 'disproportionate' tariff, BSNL had clearly 'infracted' the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, the petitioners stated.
The 'unreasonable' rates, introduced with the 'malafide' motive of supporting mobile cell operators in the private sector, was violative of the constitution, they submitted.
Bureau Report