Dear Sir/Madam,
I do hope you read until the end of this email.
These are answers to your questions.

1) It is definitely too early to establish a regulatory framework for OTT services. In a country like India where the use of the internet and more importantly, mindsets are still evolving, such framework could seriously hamper the overall development of the way we as a country have conversations about issues and perceive our government. We need to have conversations, we need to be able to use the internet for that. It's a basic human right, economic development is not just about GDP. Frameworks could be implemented later on, and not in such a drastic manner, where the only people benefitting would be the ISPs, that too at the cost of liberty.

2) It seems fair to bring the OTTs under the licensing agreement. It will level the playing field, in a way and protect Indian businesses. OTTs may not object to an increase in their costs and lose out on the huge market that is India. If this is necessary to preserve net neutrality, so be it.

3) The increase in revenue from data services has to logically be compensation. ISPs increase their costs for data packs all the time, this is a known fact. In fact if they decreased it, more people would be able to afford 3G instead of having to stick to 2G. It benefits them in the long run.
That being said, yes, their revenue streams will logically be affected, but they must work to see what they can innovate and come up with rather than choose to rule the internet.

4) The OTTs should pay, only if statistics and analysis shows that the TSPs and ISPs are being seriously and adversely affected and they require assistance, in order to prevent the standards of living of their workers from falling. Again, this measure should be implemented, only in a reasonable manner and to preserve net neutrality. But, if these OTTs increase prices for users because of this, there will be an unprecedented effect on a lot of people and put them at the whim of Indian TSPs. There are a lot of businesses that run on WhatsApp, that needs to be taken into account.

5) I agree that imbalances exist. But imposing unreasonable restrictions on them, affects a lot of people and businesses alike. Sudden changes are ill
advised when dealing with such a large population. Reasonable frameworks and restrictions will benefit everyone. Noone can benefit from a singular change in strategy. Work for a common good.

6) I'm very sure security concerns will not be impacted in any way by allowing business to determine what we use on the internet. We need to identify the line where personal liberty ends and surveillance begins.

At this point, I feel the need to address the impracticality of this. Putting a 118 page document that you expect people to read and answer such complicated questions..this is the most long winded way to solve the problem. The FCC in the United States simply made people vote and leave their comments. Such questions really require technical know how and a vast knowledge of the law and social implications. While some people may possess that, a lot do not, especially in this country. There needs to be a speedier and better way to gather public opinion on such an important issue. It is important for people to understand all aspects, but it is equally important to condense. Especially in the Indian context.
Net neutrality must be preserved. We cannot as citizens of the largest democracy in the world be subjected to the whims of big businesses. That goes against the spirit of free speech, of liberty.
Working together, and negotiating with ISPs and OTTs alike will help them reach a reasonable agreement which will benefit all. Abolishing net neutrality is not the answer. People simply can't afford it here.
If it is argued that those who will be charged are the upper middle class and above, please realize that these are people too. They are rich, but they have businesses to run and they have jobs to do. And they need the present internet for that. The skilled contribute significantly to the country's GDP.
Please uphold the spirit of human rights.
If I as a teenager can see what is wrong with this, then you as a government regulatory authority can.

Yours sincerely.