Delhi High Court Updates

amish

Star gazer
Regulars
Jul 3, 2006
24,650
1,061
Mumbai
Wow, we have to pay toll for repairs of roads/bridges. Now development fee for airport. In future I also expect others following the suit and charging development fee.So if we have to pay additional for development, what are we paying taxes for?
 

Sushubh

Administrator
[OP]
Oct 29, 2004
413,812
12,765
Gurugram
this fee has been applicable for months now. if not years. and of course... the taxes... no one ever explains what we pay taxes for if we pay surcharge for most basic utilities. if i am to travel on an airplane ONCE in my lifetime. i would pay a fee for the infrastructure i would never ever use again. and that sucks.
 


amar

Senior
Nov 9, 2010
1,942
469
Pune
The Delhi High Court today set aside the cap of 200 SMSes per day sent through a mobile phone SIM for personal communications but upheld the curb on unwanted commercial SMSes saying they infringed the "equally" important right to privacy of "unwilling recipients."

"We are, therefore, of the opinion that the impugned provision (of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) insofar as it covers non-UCCs (Unrestricted Unsolicited Commercial Communications) SMS in the present form as it exists, infringes the freedom of speech of the citizens.

"And the conditions imposed upon the freedom of speech is not reasonable which would be protected under Article 19 (2) (which deals with reasonable restrictions of freedom of speech) of the Constitution," a bench of Acting Chief Justice A K Sikri and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw said.

The bench, however, made a distinction for unsolicited commercial calls and said that the restriction imposed by the Trai on them was valid.

"We have already pointed out that the Trai has found that UCC calls and SMSes were interfering with the personal lives of the individuals as often telemarketers would call them up for selling their products. All such calls sere unsolicited, since the receiving party does not want to receive such calls or messages.

"These UCC messages disturb the recipients, intrude into their privacy, and impose a cost in terms of the time and efforts. In fact, they infringe the equally importance rights of the unwilling recipients," it said.

Partly allowing the petition of Anil Kumar, secretary of NGO Telecom Watchdog, the court, however, granted liberty to Trai "to come out with more appropriate regulations for regulating unsolicited non-UCCs SMSes that could meet the test of reasonableness under the Constitution."
Delhi High Court removes 200 SMSes per day limit - The Economic Times
 

gaurang08

Regular
Regulars
Dec 17, 2009
1,404
147
Mumbai
No wonder that marketing calls and smses have been on the rise since past 1 week .. The rules of this country really SUCK !!
 


agantuk

Bhatakti Aatma
Regulars
Jun 13, 2009
6,387
10
The 200 limit has been removed from personal messages, not marketing ones.
 

mhsabir

Xclusive
Regulars
Oct 7, 2006
19,742
2,586
Chennai
The telemarketers used to use multiple SIM to telemarket , they will now use single SIM. They never used to register that numbers as use for telemarketing, I am sure.
 

agantuk

Bhatakti Aatma
Regulars
Jun 13, 2009
6,387
10
That's the main problem. As we recently saw on the telemarketing thread, someone got a response from Airtel that the reported number was not a telemarketing number. I mean WTF. Does that mean their liability is only restricted to numbers officially registered as telemarketers?
 

anant.del

Addicts
Regulars
Jan 2, 2010
8,172
395
mobile company's fault some one who is using their no. as telemarketing should be banned as simple as that...