NEW REGULATORY TELECOM FRAMEWORK: INDIVIDUAL TELECOM DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN INDIA
Keywords:
consumer Redressal in telecom, telecom dispute resolution, telecom policy, elecom regulationAbstract
Purpose- To show scrutiny of individual consumer complaint redressal in the Indian telecom regulatory framework. This research gives an understanding of how consumer dispute resolution is structured in India and a different insight to the resolution of grievances of telecom individual consumers, and there is a modification in the framework that may provide satisfactory dispute resolution for individual consumers in the telecom arena.
Methodology-Primary analysis of data from 60 respondents using an analytical tool reveals some facts about telecom consumer redressal status in India. A qualitative approach is used for the investigation of primary data. A questionnaire is built to collect primary data.
Findings-Analysis says that lack of comprehensible role outline for dispute resolution entity. “Department of Telecom (DoT)” and the “Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) “is responsible for ensuring a healthy environment in the telecom sector.It is ambiguity in dispute regulatory roles and the nonexistence of sole authority. “TRAI” should be empowered to take dispute resolution fees from TSP's for the resolution of disputes. The Indian dispute resolution framework shows that India has accepted TSP controlled regulations by setting up the TSP -led consumer redressal process which is not an adequate approach for a satisfactory resolution. However online dispute resolution (ODR) approach is more relevant for consumer dispute resolution which is also a cost- effective and less time-consuming approach.
Scope of study-This study will be useful for the researchers, telecom professionals, service providers, policymakers, and think tanks.
The originality of work-This research is a comprehensive assessment of TRAI's progress in consumer Redressal.
Downloads
References
Aashish Aryan. 2020. “Govt: DoT Planning to Set up Telecom Ombudsman.” 2020 3rd International Conference on Information and Computer Technologies (ICICT).
Andonova, Veneta, and Luis Diaz-Serrano. 2009. “Political Institutions and Telecommunications.” Journal of Development Economics 89(1):77–83. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2008.09.006.
Aryan, A. 2020. “Govt: DoT Planning to Set up Telecom Ombudsman.”
Indianexpress.
Chakravartty, Paula. 2004. "Telecom, National Development, and the Indian State: A Postcolonial Critique." Media, Culture & Society 26(2):227–49. doi: 10.1177/0163443704041174.
Clare Hall, Colin Scott, and CHRISTOPHER Hood. 2002. Telecom Regulation.
Vol. 52. Routledge.
Dokeniya, Anupama. 1999. “Re-Forming the State: Telecom Liberalization in India.” Telecommunications Policy 23(2):105–28. doi: 10.1016/S0308- 5961(98)00082-2.
Gupta, Rajni. 2002. “Telecommunications Liberalisation Critical Role of Legal and Regulatory Regime.” Economic and Political Weekly 37(17):1668–75.
Hallur, Giri Gundu, and Vivek S. Sane. 2018. “Indian Telecom Regulatory Framework in Comparison with Five Countries: Structure, Role Description and Funding.” Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance 20(1):62–77. doi: 10.1108/DPRG-06-2017-0035.
Jain, R. S. 2001. “Spectrum Auctions in India: Lessons from Experience.” Telecommunications Policy 25(10–11):671–88. doi: 10.1016/S0308- 5961(01)00047-7.
Jayakar, Liu. 2012. “THE EVOLUTION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS POLICY-MAKING: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CHINA AND
INDIA.” Telecommunications Policy Volume 36,(Issue 1,):1–14.
John Lawford. 2005. “Telecommunication Ombudsman for Canada.” (Interest, Public Centre, Advocacy):1–45.
Kathuria, Rajat. 2000. “Telecom Policy Reforms in India.” Global Business Review 1(2):301–26. doi: 10.1177/097215090000100208.
Kinhal, D. 2020. “ODR: The Future of Dispute Resolution in India.”
Vidhilegalpolicy.
Krishna R.J. 2013. "Indias Telecom Sector Needs More than FDI." Wall Street Journal.
Levy, Brian, and Pablo T. Spiller. 1994. “The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Commitment: A Comparative Analysis of Telecommunications Regulation.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 10(2):201–46. doi: 10.1093/oxford journals.jleo.a036849.
Lindmark, Sven, Erick J. Andersson, Erick Bohlin, and Mattias Johansson. 2006. “Innovation System Dynamics in the Swedish Telecom Sector.” Info 8(4):49–66. doi: 10.1108/14636690610676540.
M.S.E.D.C.L.R. 2010. “Msedcl-Starts-Helpdesk-to-Attend-to-Complaints-of- Consumers.” Mumbai mirror.Indiatimes.
Melody, William H. 1999. “Telecom Reform: Progress and Prospects.” Telecommunications Policy 23(1):7–34. doi: 10.1016/S0308- 5961(98)00073-1.
Mujumdar, Mugdha, Sandeep Prabhu, and Giri Hallur. 2019. “A Consumer Complaints and Grievances Redressal System in Indian Telecom Sector.” International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering 8(11 Special Issue):340–45. doi: 10.35940/ijitee.K1063.09811S19.
Mukherji, Rahul. 2009. “Interests, Wireless Technology, and Institutional Change: From Government Monopoly to Regulated Competition in Indian Telecommunications.” Journal of Asian Studies 68(2):491–517. doi: 10.1017/S0021911809000680.
Paul, Manas, Parijat Upadhyay, and Yogesh K. Dwivedi. 2020. “Roadmap to Digitalisation of an Emerging Economy: A Viewpoint.” Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 14(3):401–15. doi: 10.1108/TG- 03-2020-0054.
Prasad, R. U. S. 2008. “The Impact of Policy and Regulatory Decisions on Telecom Growth in India.” (361).
Sappington, David E. M., and Dennis L. Weisman. 2010. Price Cap Regulation: What Have We Learned from 25 Years of Experience in the Telecommunications Industry? Vol. 38.
Sekhri, Desh Gaurav. 2020. “Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution : The ODR Policy Plan for India.” NITI Aayog (October):1–107.
Shin, Dong Hee. 2006. “Convergence of Telecommunications, Media and Information Technology, and Implications for Regulation.” Info 8(1):42–56. doi: 10.1108/14636690610643276.
Sourdin, Tania, and Chinthaka Liyanage. 2012. “The Promise and Reality of Online Dispute Resolution in Australia.” Online Dispute Resolution: Theory
and Practice A Treatise on Technology and Dispute Resolution (May):483– 511.
Subramanian, Ramesh. 2008. "Communications of the IIMA The ( Continuing ) Evolution of India ' s Telecom Policy The ( Continuing ) Evolution of India's Telecom Policy." Communications of the IIMA 8(3).
Thatcher, Mark. 2005. “The Third Force? Independent Regulatory Agencies and Elected Politicians in Europe.” Governance 18(3):347–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2005.00280.x.
TRAI. 2016. “Complaints / Grievance Redressal in the Telecom Sector.” TRAI Consultation Paper (15):1–27.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 The journal of contemporary issues in business and government
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
