Internet-based caller identification applications cannot override or alter designated telecom numbering norms, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) Chairman A K Lahoti said, asserting that apps are required to “follow the law of the land”.
Speaking to FE from Geneva in his first comments to any newspaper since the issue came to light, Lahoti said Trai has written to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) over caller ID applications flagging designated telecom number series as spam, stating that such practices disrupt legitimate communication between regulated entities and consumers.
“Apps have to follow the law of the land. They cannot tinker with regulatory norms,” Lahoti said.
The remarks come amid a dispute between Trai and caller identification platform Truecaller over the labelling of calls originating from the 1600 and 140 number series. While the 1600 series has been earmarked for service and transactional calls, the 140 series is reserved for promotional communications from registered entities.
Explaining the rationale behind the numbering framework, Lahoti said the 1600 series has been specifically designated for banks and other regulated entities of the BFSI sector, i.e. entities regulated by RBI, Sebi, Irdai and PFRDA, to their existing customers and by government entities for government-to-citizen communication.
Disrupted Disclosures
“The 1600 series is a designated series for banking transactions for existing banking customers. High-value transactions and other customer queries are channelised through this number series. A customer may need a loan and the bank will respond through this number. A customer may have incurred a high-value transaction and the bank wants to intimate or cross-check it. This number series is used. It’s a genuine service call,” he said.
According to Lahoti, when such calls are flagged as spam by third-party applications, legitimate communication breaks down.
“Now, if the app flags this series as spam, the service call gets disrupted. The customer is not able to receive service calls from banks. It is a breach of communication,” he said.
Lahoti also highlighted the regulatory purpose of the 140 series, saying it is a recognised channel for promotional calls and that consumers already have mechanisms to opt out if they do not wish to receive such communications.
“The 140 series is a recognised series for promotional calls. Some customers genuinely need such calls. For example, a person looking to buy a flat may want to receive such pitches,” he said.
“If customers do not want these calls, they can block them through the Do Not Disturb registry, either sector-wise or across sectors.”
The Trai chairman said both the 140 and 1600 series are part of a regulated numbering framework allotted to authorised entities, and third-party applications cannot unilaterally alter their treatment.
“Both number series are regulated entities and entities are subscribing to them. If an app flags them as spam, then it is tinkering with regulation,” Lahoti said.
He said Trai has taken up the matter with MeitY because caller identification platforms fall outside the telecom regulator’s direct jurisdiction.
“Since it is an app and is violating the regulatory framework, we have asked MeitY to take action. We have also said that if the government authorises us, we will issue directions. Correspondence on the matter is on,” Lahoti said.
He added that the Information Technology Rules are clear on the obligations of digital platforms. “The IT Rules are clear that apps have to follow the law of the land,” he said.
The comments signal Trai’s view that while caller identification applications may offer value-added services to users, they cannot override or undermine the country’s telecom numbering framework established for regulated communications.