Consumer advocacy groups have opposed the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (TRAI) proposal to abolish the advisory committee involved in handling consumer complaint appeals and transfer appellate authority entirely to senior management personnel within telecom operators.
Under proposed amendments to the Telecom Consumers Complaint Redressal Regulations, TRAI has suggested eliminating the advisory committee, which currently comprises a representative from the telecom operator and a representative from a consumer organisation. The regulator argued that routing appeals through the committee has made the appellate process inefficient due to scheduling challenges and the unavailability of members.
While telecom operators supported the proposal without objection, consumer groups disputed TRAI’s assessment.
In its submission to the regulator, the Civil Action Group said delays in complaint resolution are largely attributable to telecom operators, which often take one to three months to route grievances through the advisory committee. Another consumer organisation alleged that operators frequently fail to place complaints before the committee in a timely manner.
Consumer groups argued that removing the advisory committee would eliminate an important safeguard and create institutional bias by depriving consumers of an independent voice during the appeals process.
Instead of abolishing the committee, they proposed modernising it through digital consultations, virtual participation and mandatory turnaround timelines of five to seven days for providing recommendations.
Separately, TRAI has proposed changes to telecom operators’ interactive voice response (IVR) systems, including mandatory options for filing appeals, connecting with human agents and tracking complaints. The draft regulations also require mobile applications and web portals to provide real-time status updates and notifications, including complaint acknowledgements and technician assignment details.
Telecom operators said the proposed changes would require significant upgrades to IT systems, call centres and network interfaces. Bharti Airtel and Vodafone Idea Limited sought a transition period of six to nine months instead of the 30-day implementation timeline proposed by TRAI.
Operators also opposed requirements to generate highly granular key performance indicator reports for submission to the regulator and to their respective boards or chief executives on a quarterly basis.
On TRAI’s proposal to impose financial penalties for improper or unsatisfactory complaint resolution, telecom companies argued that the term “unsatisfactory” is subjective and could lead to arbitrary regulatory action.
Reliance Jio said the proposal amounts to double jeopardy, noting that operators are already subject to penalties under existing quality of service regulations for network and billing-related issues.
Consumer groups, however, backed the proposed financial disincentives, arguing that without meaningful penalties, complaint resolution timelines would remain procedural requirements with little incentive for operators to improve service.
