As per case facts, Reliance Jio alleged incumbent telecom operators (IDOs) and their association colluded to deny Points of Interconnection and Mobile Number Portability requests, forming an anti-competitive agreement to ... hinder its market entry. The CCI initiated an investigation based on a prima facie finding. The IDOs challenged this, arguing TRAI had exclusive jurisdiction as the sectoral regulator and was already addressing these matters. The High Court agreed, quashing the CCI's order as premature. The question arose whether CCI had jurisdiction to investigate anti-competitive practices in a regulated sector when TRAI was already involved. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that while both CCI and TRAI have distinct roles, TRAI, as the expert sectoral regulator, must first determine the foundational regulatory issues like interconnection obligations and demand reasonableness. Only after TRAI's findings on these jurisdictional facts can CCI proceed to investigate whether those actions constitute anti-competitive practices under the Competition Act, upholding a balanced approach between the regulators. The High Court's decision to quash the CCI's premature investigation was affirmed.