Justice Gita Mittal adjourned the hearing after brief arguments as the court was informed that TDSAT had passed an interim order on MTNL's plea, which had sought staying of TRAI's ADC regime.
Senior advocate C S Sundaram, who had appeared for the MTNL, told the court that TDSAT in its order did not stay the implementation of ADC regime but held that the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear appeals on TRAI's regulation.
Earlier, senior advocate G L Sanghi and Meet Malhotra, appearing for TRAI, contended that before going into the issue of merits of the case, the tribunal decided at the inception the jurisdiction aspect.
"The tribunal, in orally holding that it has jurisdiction to hear an appeal against the regulation, has assumed a jurisdiction not vested in it by law.
Only the High Courts and Supreme Court have the power to examine the vires of any legislation," Sanghi submitted.
"No tribunal has been vested with powers to go into vires of legislation having to do with the very statute under which such Tribunal is constituted," he added.
TRAI had approached the High Court against TDSAT's proceedings in MTNL matter whereby the state-owned telecom major challenged TRAI's new ADC regime.


