4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Jul 28, 2026 12:11 PM IST
A Telangana District Consumer Commission recently found Reliance Jio Infocomm guilty of unfair trade practice after it allegedly collected fresh payment from a customer to reactivate his internet connection but never restored the service. The commission directed Jiofiber to refund Rs 4,949 and pay Rs 5,000 in litigation costs.
The Ranga Reddy District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission president Chitneni Latha Kumari and member Kathyayani Khandavilli noted that the opposite party did not produce any documentary evidence, such as email or WhatsApp communication, showing it had approached the complainant’s residence to collect the router equipment before withholding the refund.
The July 9 order read that in the absence of such evidence, “we have no hesitation to hold that Opposite Party (Reliance Jion Infocomm Limited) is liable for the unfair trade practice for retaining the amount which was collected towards the connection without rendering any services despite repeated requests.”
Account suspended
The complainant, one Ankur Jaiswal, a private firm employee from Hyderabad, had subscribed to a six-month fibre internet plan from Jio on March 23, 2023, by paying Rs 2,394. He allegedly could not use the service for two months after August 2023 because he had moved to Nagpur for remote work, even though the subscription remained valid till September 22, 2023.
In October 2023, a Jio representative allegedly informed him that his account would be suspended. The man allegedly assured the company he would recharge on his return to Hyderabad. When he later tried to reactivate the connection in November 2023, he was allegedly asked to pay Rs 157.54 to reactivate the plan, followed by Rs 4,949 towards six months of plan charges. He made both payments, but his service was never restored despite repeated follow-ups with customer care.
The man’s counsel, advocate M Mrudhula Jahnavi, argued that this amounted to deficiency in service and approached the commission seeking a refund along with Rs 1 lakh for mental agony and Rs 30,000 in litigation costs.
Jio calls complaint ‘frivolous’
Jio’s counsel, advocate P Lakshman Goud, contended that the complaint was frivolous, vexatious and not maintainable, and should be dismissed with heavy compensatory costs. The company admitted receiving both payments but claimed the man’s account had already been terminated on October 9, 2023, before he attempted to recharge on November 20, 2023.
Story continues below this ad
Jio told the man on November 30, 2023 that it had no provision to reactivate a de-activated connection and that a refund would be initiated once he returned the internet equipment and shared his bank account details. Jio did not appear before the commission to file its evidence affidavit despite being given sufficient opportunity.
Ought to be “prudent internet provider”
The commission noted that there was no dispute over the two payments made by the man, since Jio had admitted to receiving them in its written version. It observed that as a prudent internet service provider, the onus was on Jio to collect the router from the complainant’s residence and process the refund, rather than wait for the customer to initiate the return.
The commission was not convinced by the “lame excuse” that refund would follow only after equipment collection, noting that Jio failed to place any evidence on record showing it had attempted to retrieve the equipment. On the question of compensation, the commission noted that the man had claimed hardship from working without internet access but did not produce documentary proof of the loss suffered, and so did not award any compensation for mental agony.
The commission allowed the complaint in part, directing Jio to refund Rs 4,949 with 9 per cent annual interest from November 20, 2023 till realisation, and to pay Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs. It gave Jio 45 days to comply, failing which the interest rate would rise to 12 per cent per annum from the same date.
Story continues below this ad
Takeaway
A service provider cannot withhold a customer’s refund by citing pending equipment return if it cannot show any actual attempt to collect that equipment. Once a provider admits to charging a customer for a service it never restored, the burden shifts to the provider to prove it acted in good faith, not the other way around.
For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and union territories (Telangana: 1800-4250-0333) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.
(Written by Avinash Verma, Avinash is an intern with the Indian Express)
