TRAI regulation-making power is broad, but challenges to subordinate regulations must be brought before the High Court.

Section 36(1) confers a broad and independent power on TRAI to make regulations for carrying out the purposes of the Act, subject only to consistency with the Act and the rules made under Section 35; the matters in Section 36(2) are illustrative and do not limit that power. The scheme of Sections 11, 12 and 13 does not narrow the regulation-making authority. However, regulations made under Section 36 are subordinate legislation, and the words "direction", "decision" and "order" in Section 14(b) do not cover a challenge to their validity. TDSAT therefore had no jurisdiction to entertain such a challenge, which lies before the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the power of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India to make regulations under Section 36 is wide and independent of the illustrative matters in Section 36(2), and whether the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal can entertain a challenge to such regulations under Section 14(b).

Analysis: Section 36(1) confers a broad power to make regulations to carry out the purposes of the Act, subject only to consistency with the Act and the rules made under Section 35. The matters listed in Section 36(2) are illustrative and do not curtail the general width of the regulation-making power. The scheme of Sections 11, 12 and 13 does not cut down that power. However, regulations framed under Section 36 are subordinate legislation, and the words "direction", "decision" and "order" in Section 14(b) do not extend to a challenge to the validity of such regulations. The appropriate forum for testing the validity of the regulations is the High Court.

Conclusion: TDSAT had no jurisdiction under Section 14(b) to entertain a challenge to regulations framed under Section 36, though the validity of such regulations could be challenged before the High Court.

---