Telecommunication Tariff (Sixty Sixth Amendment) Order, 2022

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY PART III SECTION 4

TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 27th January 2022.

No. C-3/7/(5)/2021-FEA-1- In exercise of the powers conferred upon it under sub-section (2) of section 11, read with sub-clause (i) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of the said section, of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (24 of 1997), the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India hereby makes the following Order further to amend the Telecommunication Tariff Order, 1999, namely: -

THE TELECOMMUNICATION TARIFF (SIXTY SIXTH AMENDMENT) ORDER, 2022 (1 of 2022)

1. Short title, extent and commencement: (1) This Order may be called the Telecommunication Tariff (Sixty Sixth Amendment) Order, 2022.

(2) This Order shall come into force within sixty days from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In clause 6 of the Telecommunication Tariff Order, 1999, after sub-clause (x), the following sub-clauses shall be inserted, namely:-

"(xi) Every Telecom Service Provider shall offer at least one Plan Voucher, one Special Tariff Voucher and one Combo Voucher having a validity of thirty days.

(xii) Every Telecom Service Provider shall offer at least one Plan Voucher, one Special Tariff Voucher and one Combo Voucher which shall be renewable on the same date of every month."

[Signature] (Kaushal Kishore) Advisor (F & EA)

Note.1. – The Telecommunication Tariff Order, 1999 was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part III, Section 4 under notification No.99/3 dated 9th March, 1999, and subsequently amended as given below: -

Note 2. – The Explanatory Memorandum explains the reason for the Telecommunication Tariff (Sixty Sixth Amendment) Order, 2022.

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

Introduction

1.1 The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ("TRAI"/" Authority") is established under the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 ("Act") to inter-alia, protect the interest of consumers of the telecom sector. To this effect, TRAI has been mandated to regulate tariff for telecommunication sector in India.

1.2 Section 11(2) of the Act provides, "Notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885), the Authority may, from time to time, by order, notify in the Official Gazette the rates at which the telecommunication services within India and outside India shall be provided under this Act including the rates at which messages shall be transmitted to any country outside India:

Provided that the Authority may notify different rates for different persons or class of persons for similar telecommunication services and where different rates are fixed as aforesaid the Authority shall record the reason therefor."

1.3 Further Section 11(4) of the Act also mandates that the "Authority shall ensure transparency while exercising its powers and discharging its functions".

1.4 In regulating tariffs, TRAI has over the years moved from 'forbearance with prior approval stage' to a 'forbearance regime with post-facto reporting obligation' with regulatory oversight. The regime has led to introduction of new and innovative tariff products in the market designed to provide telecom services at affordable and competitive price to the consumers. The same is reflected in the number and the composition of tariff offers made by Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) both in the prepaid and postpaid segments. However, based on the feedback received from the consumers through various channels, it has been noted that certain tariffs/ vouchers and their validity periods offered by TSPs are not to the satisfaction of a section of consumers.

Consultation Process

2.1 Of late TRAI has been receiving a number of references from consumers regarding tariff offerings of TSPs that are valid for 28 days, and cannot be perceived as monthly tariff offerings. Consumers have stated in their complaints that the validity period of 28 days not only causes confusion but also leaves them with a sense of being short-changed. Additionally, it results in inconvenience as they need to make 13 recharges in a year, given that the validity period is 28 days, rather than a calendar month. The extent of unease from the consumer perspective is clear from Parliament Questions in this regard, as well as numerous complaints and RTI applications received by the Authority.

2.2 While TRAI observed that the TSPs have been transparent in disclosing the validity period of the said tariff offers as 28 days etc., and have not generally attempted to market the same as monthly tariffs, still it is felt that considering consumer perceptions, it is necessary to look into the issue from the perspective of consumer choice as well. Further, the complaints, references, and Parliament Questions in this regard also exemplify the persistence of confusion in the minds of the consumers and the inconvenience caused to them in practical terms due to unavailability of monthly tariff offerings.

2.3 The issue was accordingly discussed with the TSPs. The TSPs pointed out that as the services are prepaid, there has to be clarity and objectivity in the duration for which the services are to be given and since different calendar months have different number of days, a calendar month should not be the basis of tariff offerings and charges for prepaid services. On the question of possible inconvenience, it was stated by them that the same cannot be resolved even if a tariff offering for 30 days is mandated as even then consumers will have to recharge more than once in months having 31 days. It was pointed out that unlike postpaid services, where a concept of fixed billing cycle on a monthly basis is followed, prepaid services resume from the date of recharge and follow the validity period of tariff expressed in terms of number of days and weeks rather than a fixed monthly billing period.