How Much You Will Have to Pay for Cable TV and DTH from 29th December?
With the Supreme Court upholding the new tariff regime proposed by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), consumer viewers can now select the television channels they want to watch and pay the maximum retail price (MRP) set by the respective broadcasters for the channel or channels. At present viewers are provided a bouquet of TV channels, many of which are never watched by the customer. 
 
Under the new tariff regime, TV viewers will get 100 free to air (FTA) channels for Rs130 plus taxes and can then select and pay only for those channels that they want to watch regularly. What this tariff order had done is to discard the practice adopted by broadcasters of clubbing a bunch of channels into a bouquet and making viewer pay for channels, which either are either free or ones that she does not want to watch. 
 
Mumbai Grahak Panchayat believes if a consumer viewer opts for a few a la carte channels coupled with 100 FTA channels, the monthly bill, including taxes, should not go beyond Rs300. 
 
Experts are divided on the new tariff regime with some feel that it would increase the cost for viewers if they continue to subscribe for all channels available at present on their cable or DTH. Those who watch select channels, can either chose particular channels or opt for bouquet offered by major broadcasters, like Sony Picture Network, Zee Entertainment, and Star India, which will result in lower cost.
 
Zee Entertainment has introduced about 68 packs starting from Rs45. Named as ‘Zee family pack’, it offers 24 channels from the group. Star India’s packs start at Rs49 for Hindi and Rs25 for Tamil. Sony Picture Network, which has broadcasting rights of 32 channels in India, is offering standard definition (SD) and high definition (HD) versions of its most popular channels at Rs90. 
 
Estimated Cost:
 
Free to Air Channels Rs130 (100 Channels) 
 
Considering price of a la carte channels
 
 
This is just an example, of which total comes to Rs179 excluding taxes. 
 
On the base tariff of Rs130, the viewer can chose any bouquet from the broadcasters. If the viewer choses all three packs mentioned above from Zee, Sony and Star, the monthly bill, excluding taxes, would be about Rs314.  (These calculations are based on rates available at this point of time).

Network capacity fee of Rs130 (excluding taxes) for 100 channels includes FTA channels or pay channel or combination thereof. Taking FTA channels is the choice of subscriber but not mandatory except the mandatory channels of ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB) (read Doordarshan channels). If the subscriber chooses pay channels, applicable MRP is payable in addition to the network capacity fee of Rs130, excluding taxes.
    
Let us understand what the TRAI regulations mandate to broadcasters, distributors and last mile operators (LMO)…
 
Whether Broadcaster, Distributor, Last Mile Operator (LMO)…
  • All channels should be offered on a-la carte basis.
  • Free to air channels cannot be part of bouquet.
  • The prices of bouquets and a la carte channels will be uniform on all the distribution platforms.
  • Distributor has to offer a basic service tier pack (BST) consisting of FTA channels.
  • This BST pack will have minimum 100 FTA channels.
  • In this 100 FTA channels 26 channels from Doordarshan are mandatory.
  • BST should contain minimum five channels of each genre like general entertainment channel (GEC), movies, kids, music, sports, news, infotainment, devotional, miscellaneous.
 
Broadcaster’s Role
  • Every broadcaster must declare each channel as a pay channel or FTA channels.
  • The MRP must be more than Zero and shall be the same on all the platforms (MSO, DTH, HITS & IPTV)
  • Price of every pay channel shall be same throughout India, which effectively does not permit regional pricing of channels.
  • If MRP exceeds Rs19, the channel cannot be offered in any bouquet but will be stand alone on a la carte basis.
  • A broadcaster’s pay channel bouquet cannot include FTA channels.
  • Broadcaster shall offer maximum of 15% of MRP as incentive.
  • Broadcaster can give promotion offer for maximum 90 days at a time.
  • Promotional offer can be offered twice in a calendar year.
 
Distributor and last mile operator (LMO)
  • All bouquets offered by broadcasters must also be offered without modification, at the price declared by each broadcaster.
  • Distributor can create bouquets by combining pay channels from different broadcasters.
  • Distributor cannot create a bouquet of pay channels plus FTA channels. 
  • Package of 100 FTA channels is different. Distributor can form bouquet with a combination of FTA channels from different broadcasters.
  • All channels must also be offered a la carte basis.
  • Both of them has to sign interconnect agreement for revenue sharing on mutually agreeable percentage share.
  • If they both do not reach an agreement then recommended revenue share will be distributor at 55% and LMO at 45%.
 
Network Capacity Fee (NCF)
 
Distributor has to declare NCF per month for customer, conditions are-
  • Network capacity fee for first 100 channels should not exceed Rs130.
  • After these 100 channels the NCF will be Rs20 for a slot of every 25 channels.
  • For calculation of one standard definition (SD) channel is counted as one & one HD channel is counted as two SD channels.
  • Distributor cannot charge subscriber any amount other than NCF for subscribing to FTA channels or bouquet of FTA Channels.
 
Quality of Service Regulation
  • Every Distributor must have a website and toll free customer care number.
  • Each consumer’s unique identification number must be mentioned in the bill.
  • Consumer must be informed about MRP, NCF, customer premised equipment (CPE), security deposit, rentals, warranty and ownership of premised equipment.
  • Must obtain a completed consumer application form.
  • Onetime installation charges for new subscribers cannot exceed Rs350.
  • Onetime activation charge cannot exceed Rs100.
  • Consumer to be refunded on a pro-rata basis in case a channel is withdrawn by the broadcaster.
  • Consumers can request temporary suspension of service up to three months, every year. Only CPE rental is applicable during this period.
  • Reactivation fee cannot exceed Rs25 for active and Rs100 for inactive subscribers.
  • Consumer must receive three days prior notice for preventive maintenance. 
 
BACKGROUND
  • The Regulations and the Tariff Order were notified by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on 3 March 2017.
 
What were these Regulations? To quote a few,
 
  • It prevented the mixing of pay channels and free to air channels in a single bouquet.
  • The Regulations restricted placing high definition (HD) format and ordinary (SD) format of the same channel in the same bouquet.
  • Another restriction was that bouquet of pay channels should not contain any pay channel where the MRP is more than Rs19.
  • There are some other caps, which say that discounts of MRP of a bouquet should not exceed 15%.
 
These Regulations were immediately challenged before the Madras High Court by Star India and Vijay Television. The primary basis for the challenge was the lack of authority of the TRAI to issue such regulations or orders under the TRAI Act, 1996.
 
The case was that the TRAI Regulations amounted to regulation of contents of the channels. The TRAI, in exercise of powers under Sections 11 and 36 of TRAI Act, can regulate only carriage or means of transmission, but cannot regulate content. The content of their programmes/broadcast is covered and controlled solely by the Copyright Act 1957, which recognised two distinct rights, one being copyright and the other being broadcast reproduction right (BRR).
 
A division bench of the Madras High Court delivered a split verdict, with one judge striking down a majority of the clauses in the Regulations and the Tariff Order under challenge, while the other judge upheld them as being in line with the TRAI Act. The case was referred to a third judge of the Madras High Court, who arrived at the same conclusion as the latter judge and held the Regulations and the Tariff Order to be valid. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Madras High Court, Star India preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court.
 
The legal basis for this submission was that programmes aired/beamed in their television channels have content which is either created by appellants themselves or procured from third parties at a huge cost and such content is governed solely by the Copyright Act.
 
After hearing a battery of Senior Advocates – Dr A M Singhvi and P Chidambaram for broadcasters, Rakesh Dwivedi and Vikas Singh for TRAI, KV Vishwanathan for Multi System Operators (MSOs), Shyam Divan for direct-to-home (DTH) operators and Krishnan Venugopal for consumers, the bench dismissed the Appeals.
 
The Supreme Court adjudicated the issue in the light of the objective of the TRAI Act, which was to harmonise interests of service providers and consumers. It was held that no constricted meaning can be given to the provisions of this Act and that the power to regulate has to be construed widely to advance the objectives of the Act.
 
It was also noted that one of the functions of the Authority, though recommendatory, is to “facilitate competition and promote efficiency in the operation of telecommunication services (which includes broadcasting services) so as to facilitate growth in such services”. It was also notice from Section 11(1)(b) that terms and conditions of interconnectivity between different service providers have to be fixed, which necessarily included terms that relate not only to carriage simpliciter but also to all terms and conditions of interconnectivity between broadcaster, MSO, Cable TV operator and the ultimate consumer.
 
The Court expressed the view that TRAI will prevail over Copy Right Act to the extent royalties/compensation payable to the broadcasters under the Copyright Act are regulated in public interest by TRAI under the TRAI Act.
 
(Varsha Raut, a consumer activist, heads the advocacy & campaigning at Mumbai Grahak Panchayat)
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

Rohan Dhage

3 months ago

The cable operator of 7Star is asking Rs.60 as operator charges in addition to NCF and GST. However, as per TRAI, it is not mentioned.
Kindly help whether these are payable or not?

REPLY

Sandeep Hande

In Reply to Rohan Dhage 2 months ago

Same here additional Rs.60 added by 7Star. Is this being charged by any DTH Operator like Tata Sky/Dish TV/Airtel etc.

antony terry

3 months ago

I know TRAI wont read this message. If we pay for each channel, will Channels/Broadcasters reduce the number of ads they show and thus help the viewers save their time? That's hard right? So we have to pay extra money and waste our time watching the ads you show.

Prahari Mali

3 months ago

It is disgusting. Why consumers are being mislead-ed by TRI by giving so much privilege to Broadcaster? We were previously enjoying at lest 250 channels with maximum of Rs.250/-(on which are ready pay 18% GST) including so much Pay channels. Now we cant afford even 100 plus a few pay channels. Why now extra burden of another of Rs.300/-is imposed on us. Why every 20 pay channel added with 100 FTA channels another Rs.25/- is to be paid?

Sivakotireddy Mula

4 months ago

It was very wrong and worse decision and I am sure operator is happy and customer will need to pay almost 80% more.
I am sure no customer will be happy.

Franklin Francis

4 months ago

What trai is trying to do is make a fool of every customer. If the customer chooses a certain channel packs he needs to pay only for that channels but here trai is trying to squeeze more by making FTA as compulsory to pay for it and in this way pay more. Advertisement is one thing and reality is another thing. If the trai really want to help consumers than Remove the FTA channels.

sai sravan

4 months ago

I used to pay 450 initially but now it changed to 850 what non-sense is the TRAI involving into.

REPLY

Prince Jhamb

In Reply to sai sravan 4 months ago

Use mi tv it has pre downloaded apps and connect with WiFi. Only 350 RS per year yes not month and if u pay from Paytm then they give u cashback also mi tv cost 13500 at amazon

David Mat Mat

In Reply to Prince Jhamb 4 months ago

What do u mean u hav pre downloaded apps onto ur TV n wit WiFi u hav to pay 350/Yr. Do u mean that all the previoisly seeing channels wil now b able to see on TV wit ur wonderful method. How does amazon come in this scenario?

Vikram S. Gupta

4 months ago

DEN not giving any discount on 2nd connection. Also they don't let me register more than one connection on my mobile. This is cheating. TRAI do some thing or some thing will be done to you people.

Indraj Rajput

4 months ago

Bakwass.... why this all channel packs coming...its useless. Initially i m paying 380 rs for whole basic starall, sonyall, zeeall, sports, movies all yaar now i cant afford 460 for this nonsense package wala drama. Its nothing to take as any way profitable. Pls v dont need your packages bcz its coming with unnecessary channels jo bilkul bhi dekhte nai or ye jabran as per rule k sath lo jisme humare channel k kahi channel aate nai. Sab scattered kar diya tha..😝

REPLY

Prince Jhamb

In Reply to Indraj Rajput 4 months ago

Use mi tv it has pre downloaded apps and connect with WiFi. Only 350 RS per year yes not month and if u pay from Paytm then they give u cashback also mi tv cost 13500 at amazon

Umasankar Brahma

4 months ago

Before TRAI s this new mess I was a happy Cable TV viewer with Rs 350 for all the channels including the HD ones... But now with this complete nonsense rule... For viewing all my fav channels and not even complete of them is costing me around 600/ rs... And I also bet all of you customers irrespective of whichever provider will be spending more thanks to TRAI s new F rule...

Vikram S. Gupta

4 months ago

If you have a jio Sim and a smart TV you don't need the cable TV connection at all. just install jio TV and jio cinema in your smart TV and you can watch all the TV channels and cinemas on your TV.

REPLY

Umasankar Brahma

In Reply to Vikram S. Gupta 4 months ago

TV mirroring is blocked on Jio TV

Gopal Datt Dobriyal

4 months ago

Sir I have opted for 100 free to air channel plus follo pack
1 universaldisneny pack-Rs 10/
2 zee pack Hindi. Rs 45/
3Hindi value star pack. Rs49
4Tv in news bouquet. Rs 1.5
5 Times now. Rs3.0
6 News 18 India. Rs 1/ Total cost.inc fta.will be 239.5
Plus GST. 43.0
Hence total will be Rs283.5
But Siti cable operator asking me pay Rs 322.5 since u r seeing total 150 channel pay 40/- extra while I am paying for pack even though I am not interested in many of them with in the pack
I think it is totally loot by trai which benefiting to cable operator however I have not paid so far clarify if I am chosen in pack why should I pay for channel wise. Let me guide should I go for consumer court or otherwise


REPLY

PRAKASH BABU

In Reply to Gopal Datt Dobriyal 4 months ago

After the free100 channels the NCF will be Rs20 for a slot of every 25 channels.*NCF- Network Capacity fee. 20+gst 18%=24/-

Roshan

4 months ago

My cable operator is asking Rs. 130 + my channel package + 18% GST & +50 Rs (Cable operator charges)

Please let me know whether this Rs. 50 is really an amount I have to pay or the operator is cheating us?

REPLY

Roshan

In Reply to Roshan 4 months ago

Anyone has some knowledgeable replies to my comment/query here? Would be appreciated, thank you.

MDT

In Reply to Roshan 4 months ago

Check this link https://www.moneylife.in/article/how-much-you-will-have-to-pay-for-cable-tv-and-dth/56113.html
Cable operator cannot ask separate money for the package.

Prahari Mali

4 months ago

Present TRI policy also does not going in favour of us rather going in favour of DTH Service Providers. We must get freedom of selecting each and every channel Free or Pay. In 100 channels free, why should other channels of other Language should be Included. Banquets of Channels also must not be imposed.
Customer must be given free hand to select each channel either in FREE (in 100 Options) or Pay channel with same rates as in Banquet. Lets leave it completely to Customers.

Prahari Mali

4 months ago

Now, Modi/BJP must into DTH and TRI issue. Stop Corporates' public looting mentality. So-long 2G/4G so many was given free hand to loot us. After entering JIO every one can see that, how other net providers doing the same thing but, now how it has become possible? In case of DTH JIO must also be given chance to enter soon so that, monopoly of DTH gangs can kick back.

Vikram S. Gupta

4 months ago

I have two set top box for cable. Previously I was able to view all channels for Rs 500 (350+250) now It comes to about 900 (450 + 450) for same. There should be some discount for second connection. Even if I go for my favourite channels it comes to more than 500. I am planning to ditch my Cable provider. Better to watch on jio TV on mobile.

REPLY

Prince Jhamb

In Reply to Vikram S. Gupta 4 months ago

Use mi tv it has pre downloaded apps and connect with WiFi. Only 350 RS per year yes not month and if u pay from Paytm then they give u cashback also mi tv cost 13500 at amazon

From a California-based Doctor to a Watchman – It's a Long, Hard Battle for Financial Consumers
When it comes to bank-related problems, there are no class barriers—each one of us is equally at risk and at the mercy of abysmal grievance redress system. Consider the stories of these two harried bank customers that Moneylife Foundation has been trying to help. 
 
Prakash Awadhesh Mishra (Mishraji to us), from Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh, works as a watchman in Mumbai. Like many people from that impoverished state, he is up-to-date on current affairs, works very hard—often doing 18-hour shifts—to earn and save every penny for his family and their future. 
 
What he does not have is a proper roof over his head in Mumbai and, consequently, an address proof. So, opening a bank account is a huge challenge and a privilege, despite all the lip-service to financial inclusion paid by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
 
He told us how he managed to open an account at Union Bank of India (UBI) only through a recurring deposit which, apparently, did not need strict address proof. Over time, he persuaded the Bank to convert his savings into a fixed deposit (which has a princely sum of Rs2 lakh) and a savings account with Rs16,000. 
 
So, when he changed jobs and moved from Bandra to Shivaji Park, he didn't dare close his account; but he remained confident that his money was safe in a nationalised bank, until he wanted to withdraw it. Now, look at what happens to people like Mishraji, dealing with incompetent private agencies, sub-contracted to issue key identity documents. 
 
Like most migrants, Mishraji has a PAN (permanent account number) card, because it is the easiest identity to obtain. It was, however, issued with a wrong date of birth (1966). He had retained it, because he had no idea how important it is to get it rectified. 
 
He also obtained an Aadhaar which the government promised was the magic number to open all doors. His Aadhaar also has another wrong date of birth (1 October 1960). He is proud to have an original birth certificate and documents from his village school (rare for people like him) which list his birth year as 1962.
 
Such mistakes are the norm. Mishraji didn’t realise the imperative need to get them rectified. In his case, every day spent on getting an identity and then rectifying it involves a loss of income. 
 
Earlier this week, Mishraji went back to Azamgarh after five long years in Mumbai. Since he has no home, withdrawing his savings from the bank was kept till the end. A couple of days before he left, he went to the bank to withdraw his savings, only to be told that his account is dormant.
 
For most educated people, getting it activated is a simple matter of submitting KYC documents afresh; but thanks to inefficient government agencies and wrong IDs, Mishraji faced a nightmare. Unlike millions of others in his situation, he got in touch with Moneylife Foundation. We are lucky to have a very committed former central banker volunteering his time to guide people. 
 
The RBI circular on dormant accounts requires banks to seek KYC documents, to reactivate the account. Typical of RBI, this prescriptive ‘fatwa’ does not take into account people like Mishraji, who don’t have proper documents even while opening the account and end up with no access to their own money. The system has no room for empathy, or alternative verification. So, he was rudely turned away and even calls from a retired CGM (chief general manager) from RBI’s consumer services department was not good enough to vouch for his identity. He, eventually, went back to Azamgarh without a chunk of his savings. 
 
Remember, Mishraji is an unusually smart and well-read person. What happens to millions of migrants who are less literate and more helpless? Wouldn't the system simply gobble up their savings? The massive pool of over Rs19,500 crore in unclaimed deposits transferred to RBI until June 2018 is testimony to this. 
 
Now let us look at another story. 
 

Dr Ajay Sood is a California-based non-resident Indian (NRI) with a non-resident ordinary (NRO) account at Bank of India’s (BOI) Chandigarh branch. The money in the account is his mother’s lifetime savings to be used for her welfare. On 20 July 2018, Dr Sood found that the account was almost emptied out, with two huge debits—of Rs98 lakh and Rs35 lakh, respectively—using cheques from his NRO account. 
 
Not only had he not withdrawn the money, but he had in his possession the original chequebooks with the exact same cheque numbers on which the money was purportedly withdrawn. 
 
After speaking to the Bank and filing a first information report (FIR), he learnt that his mobile number with the Bank had been changed and a false Aadhaar card submitted with his photograph but wrong information about his father’s name. Dr Sood did not even have an Aadhaar-linked account. 
 
Dr Sood is an innocent victim of a fraud that occurred at BOI. But BOI simply would not respond to him. He connected with Moneylife Foundation on 5th September, following which we helped take up the matter with the RBI. This, finally, led to a communication from BOI asking for the original cheques and informing him that the ‘matter of payment’ of the unauthorised withdrawal of Rs1.33 crore was “under process and will take some time. You are requested to kindly bear with us for some more time.” On 19th December, Indian Express reported that the Chandigarh police had arrested two people in connection with the fraud. But that is cold comfort for Dr Sood, since his money has still not been returned. 
 
What if the account were still in his mother’s name and this was her only source of income? Why should the victim of a bank fraud, that calls into question the bank’s weak security system and verification practices, punish an innocent customer?
 
UPDATE: After the story was published, Dr Sood, came to know credit of his principal amount in his account.
 
If RBI’s rules limit customer liability for digital fraud and mandate that victims should have their money credited back within 10 days, why is there no time-bound redress system for other innocent victims of bank frauds? Rules for digital transactions have shifted the onus of proving customer negligence in case of “banking system frauds and third-party breaches” to the bank. It is common sense that the same should apply to physical fraud, especially since a large bank ought to have a comprehensive insurance cover for such eventualities. 
 
Since Dr Sood is able to produce cheques with the same numbers that were used to withdraw massive sums of money, the finger points to internal collusion and, yet, he is subject to mental agony and his money has not been returned for over four months. 
 
Where is the accountability of bankers, who dare to ignore a customer who had a hefty Rs1.33 crore deposited with it for safe custody? Why does he need an NGO (non-government organisation) or former RBI officials to intervene to get the courtesy of a formal communication? And what about compensation and interest?
 
One of prime minister (PM) Narendra Modi’s first big actions was a financial inclusion drive to give all Indians access to formal credit through a bank account. Like several of PM’s big ideas, this one, too, had revived a failed effort of the UPA (United Progressive Alliance) government, but came with better branding (the Pradhan Mantri JandhanYojana—or Jandhan for short), plenty of hype and subterfuge in terms of genuine new accounts opened. 
 
Jandhan was further hyped-up as JAM (Jandhan-Aadhaar-Mobile) during demonetisation (after 8 November 2016) by making Aadhaar and linking of mobiles to bank accounts mandatory (until it was halted after a long-delayed Supreme Court judgement in 2018), not-so-savvy or literate bank depositors became easy prey to digital fraud. 
 
RBI watched and did nothing. Oh wait! Its deputy governor SS Mundra made a speech and published a draft regulation on limiting customer liability. The rules were, finally, notified after an online campaign and tweet-morcha in July 2017. An enabling provision was only the first step. Earlier this month, RBI has promised a separate ombudsman for digital transactions whose rules will be notified in January 2019. This is after complaints of digital fraud have risen to as much as 28% of all complaints, as in June 2018. 
 
Given the pathetic performance of the existing banking ombudsmen, who are openly biased towards banks, this does not hold out much hope for victims who see their hard-earned savings vanish.  
 
Instead of putting in place a robust grievance redress mechanism that works in a time-bound manner and a fair payment of interest, compensation and damages, the government is actually toying with the idea of a digital security cess, to create infrastructure for digital security, on top of making it increasingly mandatory to use digital transactions. Is it any wonder then that there is a massive consumer pushback and people are using more cash than ever before? 
 
For too many people, the lesson from demonetisation is that cash in hand, even when it doesn’t earn interest, is more secure than money in the bank. According to World Bank’s Global Findex Database, 2017, at a whopping 48%, India tops the world in terms of bank users with inactive bank accounts. 
 
While the government has an aggressively different spin on it, the cases that we encounter everyday at Moneylife Foundation show that there is a good reason for this state of affairs. Until RBI is made more transparent and more accountable to people and Parliament about its performance as a banking regulator and supervisor, victims of banking fraud will remain at the mercy of such a callous system—whether they are well-off or poor. 
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

K V RAO

6 months ago

I do not agree with the writer that when she asserts Mishraji is an unusually smart and well read person for the reason that his KYC docs had date of birth errors. Mishraji should have taken steps to rectify them at the earliest.

Ravindra Malve

6 months ago

Thanks Moneylife for helping them....

Most questionable part is why SC took so much time and didn't intervene strictly while AADHAR,PAN,MOBILE linking was going on??? They gave free hand to all during that period to exploit Indians. Was it deliberate????

Suketu Shah

6 months ago

This is the way life continues in India since 70 yrs plus when you have a man like Jaitly as FM.To solve such chronic issues of open fraud in the banking system you need Dr Swamy as FM but this wl not happen as he is honest.You also need moneylife advising MOfinance with Dr Swamy as FM and all these issues wl be solved from the root in a few months/yr countrywide.

The will to prevent banking frauds not there due to wrong person as FMinister and not Dr Swamy.

P M Ravindran

6 months ago

I am glad that MLF has put its finger at the right sore spot-failure of regulators and grievance redressal systems. I would like to bring in a little more clarity by highlighting the fact that the ultimate grievance redressal authority is the apex court and we should know how the judiciary as a whole is the ultimate example of a totally failed, wayward and whimsical organisation.

Amoung the comments I also found one that blames politicians who 'surely do not wish to bring about any judicial reform because they stand to gain the most from an inefficient and corrupt legal system'. It is true that our elected politicians are in the driver's seat of governance but we have seen how a few judges of the apex court invented a new meaning for the term 'consultation' and usurped the powers of the Executive to appoint and transfer judges and more recently how they trashed a duly enacted National Judicial Appointments Commission Act.

Readers are invited to read my blogs at http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/02/reforming-our-justice-delivery-system.html, http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/04/crime-of-non-governance-and-quasi.html and https://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2018/12/an-open-letter-to-chief-justice-of-india.html

REPLY

Meenal Mamdani

In Reply to P M Ravindran 6 months ago

Thank you for referencing your blogspot.
I am not well versed in legal matters but can see from your extensive writing that you are.
I hope that citizens like you can band together to reform the legal system, one reform at a time.

Harish

6 months ago

Fully agree with what you say about the Banking Ombudsman.

Ramesh Jaradhara

6 months ago

Operational Risk is a major risķ that the banks faces with the burden shifted to the customers to bear. Banking institutions did not pay much attention to the operational breaches that they make and eventually, customers have to suffer.

Meenal Mamdani

6 months ago

I would not rely on changing the mindset of Indians. Moreover the Indian mindset is miraculously changed when these same Indians live in a country where the rule of law is applied without bias and in a timely manner.
Here the wrongdoer is assured of years of litigation where the poor person keeps paying the lawyer while the case drags on and on.
The pols surely do not wish to bring about any judicial reform because they stand to gain the most from an inefficient and corrupt legal system.
Perhaps our only hope is a public spirited organization like ML Foundation which could take judicial reform as its main focus.

Anand Vaidya

6 months ago

When you have a media-starlet and then a hermit-crab as RBI guv, is there any hope of any improvement? I know you guys (MoneyLife) have been crying hoarse for consumer charter, better consumer protection and service levels from banks, but didn't happen. Now we have a puppet as Guv. He will keep ML busy :-(

Gurudutt Mundkur

6 months ago

Whatever our PM may say, it is impossible to stop frauds and bribery at the lower levels. People will continue to have problems like those stated above --- you and I cannot expect the avaricious employee, [whether he is a policeman, a bank clerk or a clerk in the Municipality or a middle manager in a Bank] from losing an opportunity to make money.
The mindset [vritee] needs to change, which is way too much to expect.

Lok Sabha passes Consumer Protection Bill 2018
The Consumer Protection Bill 2018 was passed by the Lok Sabha on Thursday amid slogan shouting by the Opposition.
 
Moving the Bill for its passage, Union Minister for Consumer Affairs Ramvilas Paswan said the Bill was non-controversial and was in the interest of the consumers.
 
He said the Bill, which seeks to establish authorities for timely and effective administration and settlement of consumers' disputes, is above partisan politics.
 
The Minister said that a penalty provision has been incorporated in the Bill, but does not envisage jail terms.
 
The Bill was passed after an hour-long discussion in which 11 members from different political parties participated and presented their views.
 
The Bill was introduced in January during the last Winter Session of Parliament.
 
It seeks to replace the three-decade-old Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and seeks to set up a Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to "promote, protect and enforce the rights of the consumers".
 
Participating in the debate, Trinamool Congress' (TMC) Pratima Mandal demanded that celebrities be restrained from endorsing any product.
 
"The celebrities or endorsers may also not be able to understand the scientific compositions of the food products and the science behind the claims. Therefore, to deal with the situations like these it may be a better option to ban celebrity endorsement completely," she said.
 
The Bill also seeks to provide Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions at national, state and district levels to look into consumer complaints.
 
She said the Bill empowers the Central government to appoint members to this commission but does not specify that the commission should have a judicial member.
 
"If the commission was to have members only from the executive, the principal of separation of powers may be violated. The Bill confers power on the Central government to appoint and remove members and provide conditions of service for members of the district, state and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission," she said.
 
Biju Janata Dal's (BJD) Tathagat Satpathy said that power to appoint members into the commission at the district and state levels lies with Central government which will be an attack on the fundamental structure.
 
Consumer Protection Councils will also be set up at the district, State, and national level, as advisory bodies. Consumer mediation cells will be set up on the same lines.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

 

User

COMMENTS

Sunil Kumar

6 months ago

Public opinion Lijiye Jo channel free-to-air the unko mana karte thaa jabardasti abhi bhi de rahe ho 130+tex kahan se ho gaya sabse pahle Agar mai
200 rupay Mein Jaan Si Aa Jaye Jab Koi aa gaya bahar se new channel chahiye ke aage rishtedari se Cartoon Network siste kahan se ho kya bole

P M Ravindran

6 months ago

I have had some of the most horrible experiences in the consumer 'courts'. To begin with, it was a reasonably good pro-consumer law. I remember having got Rs 100/- as compensation from the railways (awarded by the District Forum at Indore in the early 1990s) for their failure to confirm reservation of berths for onward journey. But then after seeing the functioning of the district forums at Palakkad and Thiruvananthapuram and State Commission at Thiruvananthapuram, followed by the National Commission at Delhi, I have seen how those tasked, empowered and paid to enforce the law have subverted it most blatantly. Two instances are narrated in my letter to the then President, Dr Abdul Kalam, under the title 'Access to Justice'. It is available at http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2012/02/access-to-justice-stake-holders-report.html. The case of Mobilgas is a must read would be an eye opener.

Explicitly in the matter of consumer grievances, please read my complaint to the then Chief Minister of Kerala and the reply by the President of the District Forum, Palakkad. These are available at http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/11/chief-ministers-contact-program.html and https://www.slideshare.net/raviforjustice/complaint-cm-contpgmconsumerreply011211 respectively.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

online financial advisory
Pathbreakers
Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
online financia advisory
The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Online Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
financial magazines online
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
financial magazines in india
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)