RCom, Tata cry foul as govt asks SC on legality of dual tech

New Delhi: Dual technology telecom licence holders seem flummoxed by the government’s decision to ask the Supreme Court about the legality of their licences in the wake of the 2G judgement of 2 February.

According to a report in The Economic Times, the Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers (AUSPI), which comprises dual technology players such as Tata Teleservices and Reliance Communications, has written to the government on the matter some days back. An AUSPI official explained that it was a mere “coincidence” that the spectrum allocation for dual technology licence holders happened on the same day when Andimuthu Raja was awarding the now-tainted 2G licences.[caption id=“attachment_268371” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Supreme Court of India. Reuters”] [/caption]

Dual technology refers to Global System of Mobile Communications (GSM) and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) - the two main technology standards used in India. While the vast bulk of telecom players use GSM, Tata and Reliance started out with CDMA, but when they saw the public’s preference for GSM, they opted to use both technologies.

“We received licences in 2006 but since spectrum was not available then, it was allotted to us in 2008, conicidentally on the very day that other 2G GSM licenses were being given out. Out licences were given on a first-come, first-served basis much earlier, just like every other licence given during this period. We duly paid the Rs 1,659 crore licence fee required to hold dual licences. And the legality of our dual technology licences has been upheld in various fora thereafter. So why the query now?” this official wondered.

In fact, AUSPI has written to the Department of Telecom last fortnight, once again clarifying its stand on the matter. The official said that opposition to dual licences began in 2007 itself when COAI (Cellular Operators’ Association of India), a body comprising GSM players, challenged it in the Telecom Disputes Settlement Tribunal (TDSAT).

“But they were overruled because we cited the 2003 policy as well as the National Telecom Policy according to which dual technology licences were valid. Then, COAI went to the High Court, which also ruled in our favour. The matter is now with the Supreme Court but no hearing has happened on it in the last four years,” this AUSPI official said. The 2003 policy of unified access licences allowed operators to provide services which cover collection, carriage, transmission and delivery of voice and non-voice messages over their networks.

He said the government had already told a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) that dual technology licences are valid, citing the same two policies. Earlier this year, the COAI had alleged that CDMA operators like Reliance Communications and Tata Teleservices had benefited from DoT’s policy change in 2007 which allowed use of an alternate technology on existing license (dual technology).

COAI had alleged that dual technology operators paid ongoing spectrum usage charges on a disaggregated spectrum basis as opposed to paying on a combined spectrum basis (as done by GSM operators) and that this had caused a major loss to the government.

AUSPI had denied these charges, saying that since the two technologies operating on the allocated spectrum technically could not be combined for use, there was no case for paying spectrum usage charge on a combined basis.