A District Client Disputes Redressal Fee in Himachal Pradesh has held Reliance JioFiber responsible of deficiency in service and unfair commerce apply after repeated web outages disrupted a Shimla resident’s broadband connection. The fee directed the web service supplier to pay ₹10,000 as compensation for psychological agony and litigation bills whereas additionally restoring the client’s web connection freed from price.
What was the criticism?
The complainant, Pratima Chauhan, had subscribed to a six-month JioFiber broadband plan after paying ₹ 2,824.92 in March 2025. Based on the criticism, the web connection stopped functioning in April 2025, severely affecting her tutorial work and each day actions.
Regardless of elevating a number of complaints via the corporate’s buyer assist channels, Chauhan alleged that the connectivity points continued and have been by no means completely resolved. Annoyed by the repeated outages, she approached the District Client Fee searching for reduction.
JioFiber’s defence
Reliance JioFiber denied any deficiency in service and argued that the complainant herself had cancelled service requests earlier than they may very well be accomplished. The corporate maintained that the broadband concern had finally been resolved and claimed that technicians had made a number of makes an attempt to contact the client.
JioFiber additionally knowledgeable the fee that the technician who had attended the criticism was not employed by the corporate.
Client Fee’s comment
The bench, comprising President Dr Baldev Singh and Member Nidhi Sharma, discovered that JioFiber had failed to supply any convincing technical proof to show that the client’s grievance had been absolutely addressed.
In its order dated July 21, 2026, the fee noticed:
“The plea of the alternative celebration (JioFiber) is that the grievance of the complainant has been redressed, and he or she is repeatedly having fun with the JioFiber companies with none interruption. Therefore, it’s for the alternative celebration to show via proof on file that the alternative celebration has redressed the grievance of the complainant.”
The fee additional famous that whereas the telecom firm claimed the difficulty had been resolved, it didn’t submit any affidavit from the involved technician or different technical data to substantiate its declare.
Fee holds JioFiber liable
Holding the corporate responsible of deficiency in service and unfair commerce apply, the patron fee directed JioFiber to revive Pratima Chauhan’s broadband connection freed from price.
Moreover, it ordered the corporate to pay a lump sum compensation of ₹ 10,000, masking each psychological harassment and litigation prices. The order directs JioFiber to conform inside 45 days of receiving the licensed copy.
