Tribunal Rules 3G Roaming Pact as Illegal

[Xen]

A telecom tribunal on Tuesday held that pacts made by telecom companies to offer 3G roaming mobile services are illegal.

The chairman of the Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), Justice S.B. Sinha, said that the department of telecommunications (DoT) should send out fresh notices to the telecom operators, while another judge on the tribunal called for an immediate end to the pacts.


DNA

 

[Xen]

The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) looking into the 3G roaming mobile services on Tuesday gave a split verdict in the case with its chairman directing the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) to send out fresh notices to telecom operators while another judge ruling that the pact formed between telecom majors on 3G must be ended.

Leading telecos like Bharti, Vodafone and Idea had entered into an agreement with one another to offer 3G services in circles in which they could not succeed in getting spectrum in an auction held in 2011. The DoT had ruled their pact illegal on December 23.

While holding the pact illegal, the Chairman of the TDSAT said that DoT could initiate fresh proceedings in the case.
"The principles of natural justice were violated while forming the pact. The Department of Telecommunications can initiate fresh proceedings in the case," he said.

A member of the tribunal said that companies could not form 3G ICR (intra-circle roaming) pacts and that companies must have 3G spectrum in a particular circle to offer 3G services.

The ruling is expected to extend the stalemate between the DoT and the telecos.


IBN

 

[Chief]

DoT seeks legal opinion on TDSAT's split verdict



The Department of Telecom has sought legal opinion on whether to implement the split verdict of telecom tribunal TDSAT on validity of mobile phone operators offering 3G services beyond their licence areas under roaming pacts.

Immediately after the verdict was given by TDSAT, a senior DoT official wrote to Additional Solicitor General A S Chandhiok seeking his opinion on the legal position with respect to applicability of the order of the tribunal. The two members of the tribunal bench differed with each other.

The split verdict came on a petition filed by mobile phone companies challenging a government order asking them to stop offering 3G services beyond their licensed circles or zones under mutual roaming agreements.

The two-member bench comprising Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) Chairman Justice S B Sinha and Member P K Rastogi differed in their findings.

While Justice Sinha allowed operators' plea against the government's directive to stop intra circle 3G roaming saying it was violating natural justice, Justice Rastogi dismissed the petition saying they cannot provide roaming.

The Chairman was of view that DoT (Department of Telecom) had not followed the proper procedure and operators were not given proper time to put their views, but Rastogi dismissed the appeal saying that they can't provide 3G services by having mere 2G licence.

The spilt verdict left the Department of Telecom in a difficult position and it wanted to know the legal position in respect of implementation of 1:1 order of TDSAT.

The letter, written by Senior Deputy Director General (Access Services) A K Mittal, also asked the Additional Solicitor General that if the order of TDSAT was not applicable, could the DoT take action against the service providers and was it "necessary or advisable to issue fresh show cause notices?"

Several telecom companies including Airtel, Vodafone, Idea, Aircel and Tata Tele had filed petitions in the TDSAT challenging the December 23, 2011 directive of DoT to scrap their intra-circle roaming pacts within 24 hours.

Under the pact, telecom service providers had entered into mutual agreement with each other to facilitate roaming facilities without bringing in DoT in to the picture.

TDSAT has a sanctioned strength of three judges including the Chairman. However, due to retirement of its technical member, the tribunal now has two judges which led to the split verdict.

Immediately after the split verdict, the DoT also informed the Additional Solicitor General that caveats were being filed in the Supreme Court and Delhi HIgh Court on the issue.