India's telecom regulator is facing a direct challenge over its handling of 5G network slicing, with MediaNama founder Nikhil Pahwa telling TRAI's Open House Discussion on Quality of Service that service-specific slices must be barred and that any slicing decision should be frozen until a separate net neutrality consultation runs its course.

Pahwa, who led the SaveTheInternet.in campaign in 2015 and 2016 that produced one of the world's strictest net neutrality regimes, said network slicing belongs in a net neutrality consultation, not in a quality-of-service regulation. He noted that the Department of Telecommunications has asked TRAI to revisit the issue, and he flagged reports that TRAI may even consider a consultation paper on net neutrality — a combination he called a serious cause for concern.

"This would effectively upend India's digital economy as it functions right now," Pahwa told the Open House. "Telecom operators should not shape consumer experience or consumer choice by treating different services differently. That is why service-specific, sector-specific and content-specific network slices should not be allowed."

The core of his argument is precedent. Bharti Airtel, he said, sliced out VoIP as a separately priced package in December 2014 — an early instance of differential treatment by application type. In 2010 and 2014, Airtel also throttled some connectivity and boosted speeds for select services, including YouTube during the 2010 IPL cricket season. In Pahwa's framing, operators have already demonstrated in practice what slicing enables: prioritising some services and deprioritising others, which distorts the neutrality of the consumer experience.

He invoked the principle articulated by former TRAI chairman R.S. Sharma: what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly either. Neutrality obligations that apply across the network also apply within and between network slices.

The intervention carries commercial weight. Reliance Jio has publicly argued for allowing service-specific network slices. Pahwa warned that if TRAI permits them, one of two outcomes follows: either a startup launching a video app is forced to join a paid video slice — effectively a distribution fee — or it competes against an operator that prioritises its own vertically integrated consumer services over the rest of the market.

"It is not about blocking alone; it is also about preferential treatment," Pahwa said. "Today, telecom operators also have consumer-facing services, and there is a risk of their vertical integration being used to prioritise their own services over the rest of the market."

He also rejected an argument made by a consumer rights speaker at the session who supported slicing on the grounds that only speed degradation should be prevented. Net neutrality regulations, Pahwa countered, do not distinguish between consumers and businesses; they treat all users as equal because all pay for bandwidth. A user can launch a business competing against an incumbent on a level playing field precisely because neutrality guarantees that field.

The scale argument is central to his case. Since the net neutrality rules took hold, India has grown from 230 million internet connections in 2015 to roughly a billion today — a expansion Pahwa attributes to a level playing field for product builders, alongside Jio's reduction of data charges. The solution to consumer quality complaints, he argued, is adding network capacity, not differentiating services. Neutral access, he added, matters even more as AI creates an uncertain environment for India's internet economy.

The dispute has also become a transparency fight. MediaNama filed a Right to Information request with TRAI seeking copies of all non-confidential communications between TRAI and Reliance Jio on network slicing, as well as submissions from operators and industry bodies on 5G slicing, differentiated QoS and net neutrality dating from 1 January 2023, plus minutes of meetings and internal notes relying on operator inputs for the Quality of Service Regulations of 2024. TRAI's Central Public Information Officer, Jitendra Kumar Joshi, responded by pointing to a consultation paper dated 5 August 2026 on amendments to the QoS Regulations 2024, including 5G network slicing, and to published stakeholder comments. That response, Pahwa said, does not address the requests for documents on operator lobbying. MediaNama has filed an appeal and will take the matter to the Central Information Commission if needed.

"For a regulator historically known for its transparency and accountability, the response to that RTI reflects very poorly on TRAI," Pahwa said. TRAI Principal Advisor Pushpendra Kumar Singh told him the RTI point "could have been discussed on other platforms," a pushback Pahwa said he does not accept.

Pahwa closed with a procedural demand: if TRAI proceeds with a net neutrality consultation, decisions on network slicing in the current QoS process must be withheld until the neutrality question is resolved. TRAI has already sought stakeholder comments on the proposed QoS amendments covering 5G network slicing, and the appeal over the RTI response is pending — leaving both the regulatory outcome and the disclosure fight unresolved for now.