Mobile portability stuck? One RTI to TRAI and DoT

You sent PORT to 1900, got a code, handed the form to the new operator, and then nothing happened. Your number sits in limbo between two telecom companies and each blames the other. The Right to Information Act 2005 gives you a way to cut through this, because the records of every porting request, every rejection and every complaint live with public authorities: the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and the Department of Telecommunications (DoT). A ₹10 RTI forces a written answer within 30 days.

Mobile Number Portability runs on the Telecommunication Mobile Number Portability Regulations 2009, which TRAI has amended several times, most significantly in December 2019. The December 2019 change matters to you because it killed the old game of operators rejecting port-out requests at the last minute:

• For an individual subscriber, a porting request submitted with a valid UPC within its validity period will not be rejected. The donor operator has no discretion left.
• For a corporate number, rejection is allowed for exactly one reason: the request is not accompanied by a valid authorisation letter signed by the authorised signatory.
• The real gatekeeping moved to UPC generation. You get the 8-digit code only if you pass all eligibility checks, and if you fail any one of them the reason comes to you by SMS.

The verified timelines, straight from TRAI's current FAQ:

The porting charge is ₹6.46 per request, and only if the new operator asks for it. Many operators charge nothing. Your prepaid balance lapses when you port, and a postpaid user's refundable deposit must be returned by the old operator.

• UPC refused. You fail an eligibility check: less than 90 days on the current network, an unpaid postpaid bill, an ownership change in process, the number being sub-judice, pending contractual obligations under the exit clause of your agreement, or a SIM swap in the last 7 days. The SMS tells you which one, in short code.
• UPC issued, porting delayed. The request is in, the 3 or 5 working day window passes, and the SIM swap never happens. The SMS trail stops midway.
• Corporate port rejected. The authorisation letter is questioned as invalid even when it is signed properly.
• Name or KYC mismatch. The porting form name does not match operator records, and the request is parked rather than processed.

The “contractual obligation pending” rejection that older guides talk about now surfaces at the UPC stage, as eligibility check (g). That is why your first move is the eligibility SMS, and your second move is a written complaint, because everything after that needs a paper trail.

TRAI does not directly adjudicate individual disputes, and private operators are not public authorities under §2(h) of the RTI Act, so you cannot serve an RTI on Airtel, Jio or Vi. The sequence that works:

1. Complain to your operator's complaint centre and note the ticket number.
2. Unresolved or rejected? Escalate to the same operator's appellate authority. TRAI's grievance-redressal page links every operator's complaint centre and appellate authority.
3. Also lodge the grievance on CPGRAMS (pgportal.gov.in), which routes telecom grievances to DoT. Note that number too.
4. Now the RTI has teeth. TRAI and DoT are public authorities. Ask each for what it holds: the action taken on your complaint, the correspondence sent to the operator, and the porting performance records.

This is the same discipline as our CPGRAMS grievance escalation guide: the grievance creates the file, the RTI reads the file.

• §6(1) RTI Act — any citizen may ask a public authority for information held in material form. No reason needed.
• §6(3) — file with the wrong central office and the PIO must transfer it to the right one within 5 days, not reject it.
• §7(1) — reply within 30 days.
• §19(1) — first appeal to the department's First Appellate Authority if the reply is silent, late or evasive, within 30 days of the deadline passing. §19(3) — second appeal to the Central Information Commission within 90 days.
• TRAI Act 1997 — the statute under which TRAI made the MNP regulations. TRAI remains the sector regulator and a public authority in its own right.

To,
The Central Public Information Officer,
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India / Department of Telecommunications,
[full postal address].

Subject: Application under §6(1) of the RTI Act 2005 — MNP request
for mobile number [10-digit number]

Sir/Madam,

Kindly provide the following information held by your office in
relation to the above number, subscriber [name], LSA [circle]:

1. The specific eligibility criterion on account of which the Unique
   Porting Code was refused on [date], as recorded in the system,
   and the rule or regulation it maps to.
2. Copies of correspondence issued to the telecom service provider
   following my complaint No. [number] dated [date], including any
   direction or reminder.
3. The present status and action taken on that complaint, with file
   notings.
4. The number of porting requests from this LSA that exceeded the
   prescribed working-day limit in the last quarter, and the number
   of UPC rejections attributed to contractual obligations.
5. Name and designation of the officer handling consumer grievances
   for this LSA.

Payment of Rs 10 is made online [transaction reference].
[Name, full address, phone, email, date]

File it on rtionline.gov.in for TRAI or DoT, or by registered post with an Indian Postal Order. If the reply cites third-party information about the operator, remember you are asking about your own number and your own complaint, which is not third-party information.

• Serving the RTI on the mobile operator. Private operators are not public authorities. The RTI goes to TRAI or DoT, which hold the compliance records.
• Asking “why is my port stuck?” — a question invites opinion. Ask for the recorded reason, the dates and the correspondence.
• Skipping the complaint stage. Without a ticket number, question 2 of the template has nothing to bite on.
• Missing the 24 hour withdrawal window if you change your mind, then filing a fresh request during the confusion. Send CANCEL to 1900 and start clean.
• Forgetting the 90 day rule after the last port and burning an RTI on an eligibility failure that is actually correct.

Often not. The refusal SMS names the failed check. Clear that check with the operator, wait the required period if it is the 90 day or 7 day SIM-swap rule, and request again. RTI is for when the stated reason is false and the operator will not correct it.

For an individual number, no. A valid UPC used in time makes the porting request unchallengeable except on corporate authorisation grounds.

Ask the recipient operator for the SMS schedule date first, then file the RTI for the porting request status, the delay reason on record and the action on your complaint. The date and time of the porting SMS is itself evidence.

TRAI for regulatory compliance records and complaint follow-up, DoT for licensing-side and CPGRAMS-routed grievances. Filing with the wrong one costs 5 days at most, because §6(3) forces a transfer.

₹6.46 per request if the new operator charges at all. Anything beyond that is not an MNP charge.

No. The unspent prepaid balance lapses at porting. Use it up before you submit the request. Postpaid deposits must be refunded by the old operator.

The First Appeal Builder writes the §19(1) appeal, and the Timeline Tracker prints your deadlines.

• How to file a TRAI or telecom complaint — 2026 guide
• Telecom bill dispute? File one RTI
• How to port your mobile number — MNP 2026
• How to activate international roaming — 2026 guide
• Aadhaar update stuck? File one RTI to UIDAI
• File RTI online — 12 steps · State-wise RTI fees · RTI Act 2005
• The RTI Playbook — the complete method, chapter by chapter

• TRAI, Mobile Number Portability FAQ (page updated 25 August 2026): trai.gov.in/faqcategory/mobile-number-portability — timelines, UPC validity, ₹6.46 charge, rejection grounds, withdrawal window
• TRAI, Grievance Redressal Mechanism for telecom consumers: trai.gov.in/consumer-info/telecom/grievance-redressal-mechanism
• RTI Act 2005, §2(h), §6(1), §6(3), §7(1), §19: cic.gov.in

Last reviewed: 27 August 2026. Every timeline, the ₹6.46 charge and the no-rejection rule for individual porting verified against the TRAI MNP FAQ as updated 25 August 2026, and the escalation path against TRAI's grievance-redressal page. The earlier version of this page carried the pre-2019 rejection regime and two case citations that could not be verified. They have been removed.