“52.On the last date of hearing, in view of the objections continued to be raised by the Counsel for the Respondents that the Petition No.9 of 2001 could only examine a change to Access Charges and not to Port Charges and in view of the fact that the Counsel for the Respondent admitted that the Petitioners were free to file a separate Petition challenging Port Charges demanded under Circular dated 2-11-01 and that they would be within limitation, and in order to avoid any technical objections, and in deference to the observations made by this Hon’ble Tribunal, the Petitioners are filing the present Petition challenging the Claim / Levy Demand of Port charges vide Circular dated 2-11-01 as being contrary to the Interconnection Regulations of May 1999, the Circular dated 25-10-99 novating the Interconnect Agreement, the Reissued Interconnection Regulations of December 2001 and as bad in law, illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. The Petitioners state and submit that this Hon’ble Tribunal had already granted Interim Directions in Petition No.9 of 2001, in addition to the Orders dated 10-72001 and especially in the Order dated 8-3-02, wherein this Hon’ble Tribunal has recorded that ‘any payment made by the Petitioners will abide by the result of this Petition…..’ Thus, the amounts paid by the Petitioners towards Port Charges have been paid without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised in the pending Petition No.9 of 2001 and that payments have been made by the Petitioners and accepted by the Respondents fully conscious of the fact that the matter was subjudice, and are liable to be refunded with interest, once this Hon’ble Tribunal holds in favour of the Petitioners.
