ITV

Category: TRAI

  • TRAI explores methodology for QoS under DAS regime

    NEW DELHI: As the country moves towards the final phase of digital addressable systems, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India wants to know if there should be a uniform regulatory framework for quality of service and consumer protection across all digital addressable platforms.

    TRAI has also sought opinion of stakeholders on the standards and essential technical parameters for ensuring good quality of service for digital cable TV, direct-to-home (DTH), head-end in the sky (HITS) and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV).

    The opinion has been sought in a detailed consultation paper on ‘Issues related to quality of services in Digital Addressable Systems and consumer protection’, and stakeholders have been asked to send in their comments by17 June and counter-comments if any by 1 July.

    In over fifty questions posed to stakeholders, it wants to know the broad contours for quality of rervice regulatory framework for digital addressable systems.

    The regulator has asked if timelines relating to various activities to get new connection should be left to the Distribution Platform Operators (DPOs) to be transparently declared to the subscribers.  What should be the time limits for various activities including consumer application form and installation and activation of service for new connections, it wants to know.  

    Referring to a query often asked by stakeholders, the Regulator wants to know if the minimum essential information to be included in the CAF should be mandated through regulations to maintain basic uniformity.  Should the use of e-CAF be facilitated, encouraged or mandated, it has asked.

    It wants to know whether the minimum essential information to be included in the Manual of Practice be mandated through regulations to maintain basic uniformity and to ensure that consumers get all relevant information about the services being subscribed.

    TRAI wants to know if an initial subscription period can be charged while providing a new connection to protect the interest of subscribers as well as DPOs, and the protections for subscribers and DPOs during initial subscription period.

    TRAI wants to know the methodology of reduction in subscription charges be calculated in case of discontinuation of channel from DPOs platform.

    Stakeholders have been asked to give their opinion on the maximum permissible time of disruption beyond  which subscriber must be compensated if there is disruption due to technical fault on the DPO network or at the subscriber’s end; disruption due to technical fault of Consumer Premises Equipment at the subscriber’s end.

    The stakeholders have been asked why the uptake of mandated schemes for set top box (Outright purchase, hire purchase, and on rent) is so low at present and whether this is due to lack of consumer awareness and what other methods should be used for this.

    Opinion has also been sought on the billing cycle both for pre-paid and post-paid and whether deduction of maintenance related charges for CPE from the pre-paid subscription account should be prohibited.

    Comments have been sought on call centre availability hours, multiple languages in Interactive Voice Response, response time for answering IVR and voice to voice calls and  d. Sub menu and accessibility of customer care executive.

    What should be the innovative ways to develop a speedy user friendly complaint registering and redressal framework using Mobile Apps, SMS, online system etc., the regulator has asked.

     

  • TRAI explores methodology for QoS under DAS regime

    NEW DELHI: As the country moves towards the final phase of digital addressable systems, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India wants to know if there should be a uniform regulatory framework for quality of service and consumer protection across all digital addressable platforms.

    TRAI has also sought opinion of stakeholders on the standards and essential technical parameters for ensuring good quality of service for digital cable TV, direct-to-home (DTH), head-end in the sky (HITS) and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV).

    The opinion has been sought in a detailed consultation paper on ‘Issues related to quality of services in Digital Addressable Systems and consumer protection’, and stakeholders have been asked to send in their comments by17 June and counter-comments if any by 1 July.

    In over fifty questions posed to stakeholders, it wants to know the broad contours for quality of rervice regulatory framework for digital addressable systems.

    The regulator has asked if timelines relating to various activities to get new connection should be left to the Distribution Platform Operators (DPOs) to be transparently declared to the subscribers.  What should be the time limits for various activities including consumer application form and installation and activation of service for new connections, it wants to know.  

    Referring to a query often asked by stakeholders, the Regulator wants to know if the minimum essential information to be included in the CAF should be mandated through regulations to maintain basic uniformity.  Should the use of e-CAF be facilitated, encouraged or mandated, it has asked.

    It wants to know whether the minimum essential information to be included in the Manual of Practice be mandated through regulations to maintain basic uniformity and to ensure that consumers get all relevant information about the services being subscribed.

    TRAI wants to know if an initial subscription period can be charged while providing a new connection to protect the interest of subscribers as well as DPOs, and the protections for subscribers and DPOs during initial subscription period.

    TRAI wants to know the methodology of reduction in subscription charges be calculated in case of discontinuation of channel from DPOs platform.

    Stakeholders have been asked to give their opinion on the maximum permissible time of disruption beyond  which subscriber must be compensated if there is disruption due to technical fault on the DPO network or at the subscriber’s end; disruption due to technical fault of Consumer Premises Equipment at the subscriber’s end.

    The stakeholders have been asked why the uptake of mandated schemes for set top box (Outright purchase, hire purchase, and on rent) is so low at present and whether this is due to lack of consumer awareness and what other methods should be used for this.

    Opinion has also been sought on the billing cycle both for pre-paid and post-paid and whether deduction of maintenance related charges for CPE from the pre-paid subscription account should be prohibited.

    Comments have been sought on call centre availability hours, multiple languages in Interactive Voice Response, response time for answering IVR and voice to voice calls and  d. Sub menu and accessibility of customer care executive.

    What should be the innovative ways to develop a speedy user friendly complaint registering and redressal framework using Mobile Apps, SMS, online system etc., the regulator has asked.

     

  • Ad cap case put off to 1 August, court to hear plea challenging stay order

    Ad cap case put off to 1 August, court to hear plea challenging stay order

    NEW DELHI: There is clearly no indication to an early resolution to the controversial issue of adcaps on television channels, with yet one more adjournment of the petitions pending before the Delhi High Court, this time to 1 August.

    The matter was put off by chief justice G Rohini and justice Jayant Nath as they did not have time to hear the matter in view of urgent cases.

    When the case comes up next, it is expected to take up an application by intervenor Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd seeking vacation of the order staying action against violating television channels.

    In the hearing on 29 March, a plea was made on behalf of the Information and Broadcasting ministry that a proposal was being contemplated to amend the relevant provision relating to limiting ads to 12 minutes an hour.

    However counsel Vivek Sarin of Home Cable counsel pressed for early hearing of his application for vacation of stay. Thereupon, counsel for Discovery Communications said it wanted to press its application to come in as intervenor. The court had on 11 February agreed to take up the application by Discovery Communications to intervene on the matter.

    Earlier on 27 November last year, the court chaired by the chief justice had said the matter had been pending for some time and therefore it would hear and conclude the case in the next hearing. On that day, the I and B Ministry had informed the Court that it was in talks with the News Broadcasters Association and other stakeholders on the issue of the advertising cap of 12 minutes per hour. This was the first time that the ministry had put in an appearance in the petition filed by the News Broadcasters and others against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and others.

    Home Cable Network Pvt. Ltd had been permitted to intervene on 5 January and the Court had agreed to consider contentions on whether pay channels should be permitted to carry commercials in view of subscription fee charged by them. Home Cable Counsel Vivek Sarin had told the court that the petitioners had not disclosed that broadcasters had given their consent to observe the 10+2 ad cap rule under the Cable Television Network Regulation Rules 1994 and the Act that followed a year later and also under the Uplink and Downlink Guidelines. He also said pay TV broadcasters should not be allowed to take ads as they charged subscription fee.

    The case, filed by News Broadcasters Association and others against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and the Union Government, has so far been adjourned from time to time on the plea that the government and the broadcasters are in talks on this issue.

    The court has already directed that the order that TRAI would not take any action against any channel pending the petition would continue. In an earlier hearing, the court had, at the regulator’s instance, directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels. Apart from the NBA, the petitions have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamoru, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

    Meanwhille, complaints against fifteen broadcasters by TRAI on the ad cap issue are also pending with the chief metropolitan magistrate in Delhi.

  • Ad cap case put off to 1 August, court to hear plea challenging stay order

    Ad cap case put off to 1 August, court to hear plea challenging stay order

    NEW DELHI: There is clearly no indication to an early resolution to the controversial issue of adcaps on television channels, with yet one more adjournment of the petitions pending before the Delhi High Court, this time to 1 August.

    The matter was put off by chief justice G Rohini and justice Jayant Nath as they did not have time to hear the matter in view of urgent cases.

    When the case comes up next, it is expected to take up an application by intervenor Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd seeking vacation of the order staying action against violating television channels.

    In the hearing on 29 March, a plea was made on behalf of the Information and Broadcasting ministry that a proposal was being contemplated to amend the relevant provision relating to limiting ads to 12 minutes an hour.

    However counsel Vivek Sarin of Home Cable counsel pressed for early hearing of his application for vacation of stay. Thereupon, counsel for Discovery Communications said it wanted to press its application to come in as intervenor. The court had on 11 February agreed to take up the application by Discovery Communications to intervene on the matter.

    Earlier on 27 November last year, the court chaired by the chief justice had said the matter had been pending for some time and therefore it would hear and conclude the case in the next hearing. On that day, the I and B Ministry had informed the Court that it was in talks with the News Broadcasters Association and other stakeholders on the issue of the advertising cap of 12 minutes per hour. This was the first time that the ministry had put in an appearance in the petition filed by the News Broadcasters and others against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and others.

    Home Cable Network Pvt. Ltd had been permitted to intervene on 5 January and the Court had agreed to consider contentions on whether pay channels should be permitted to carry commercials in view of subscription fee charged by them. Home Cable Counsel Vivek Sarin had told the court that the petitioners had not disclosed that broadcasters had given their consent to observe the 10+2 ad cap rule under the Cable Television Network Regulation Rules 1994 and the Act that followed a year later and also under the Uplink and Downlink Guidelines. He also said pay TV broadcasters should not be allowed to take ads as they charged subscription fee.

    The case, filed by News Broadcasters Association and others against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and the Union Government, has so far been adjourned from time to time on the plea that the government and the broadcasters are in talks on this issue.

    The court has already directed that the order that TRAI would not take any action against any channel pending the petition would continue. In an earlier hearing, the court had, at the regulator’s instance, directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels. Apart from the NBA, the petitions have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamoru, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

    Meanwhille, complaints against fifteen broadcasters by TRAI on the ad cap issue are also pending with the chief metropolitan magistrate in Delhi.

  • SC nixes TRAI’s compensation directive for call drops

    New Delhi: In a judgment that comes as a major relief to telecom operators even as it hits the users, the Supreme Court today held as arbitrary and unconstitutional a decision by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in October last year  imposing a compensation for call drops.

    The decision came on an appeal by the the telcos after their petition in the Delhi High Court was dismissed in December last against the directive of compensation of Rs one for every call drop, limited to a maximum of three such calls per day. The TRAI order of October last year was to come into effect from 1 January.

    The Apex Court said the order was “illegal and not transparent”.

    Talking to newspersons outside the court, telecom operators counsel Kapil Sibal said: “(The) SC has rendered historic judgement today by striking down Trai s regulation.”

    “The court said the regulation was unreasonable, arbitrary and the procedure followed was not transparent,” he added. 

     

  • SC nixes TRAI’s compensation directive for call drops

    New Delhi: In a judgment that comes as a major relief to telecom operators even as it hits the users, the Supreme Court today held as arbitrary and unconstitutional a decision by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India in October last year  imposing a compensation for call drops.

    The decision came on an appeal by the the telcos after their petition in the Delhi High Court was dismissed in December last against the directive of compensation of Rs one for every call drop, limited to a maximum of three such calls per day. The TRAI order of October last year was to come into effect from 1 January.

    The Apex Court said the order was “illegal and not transparent”.

    Talking to newspersons outside the court, telecom operators counsel Kapil Sibal said: “(The) SC has rendered historic judgement today by striking down Trai s regulation.”

    “The court said the regulation was unreasonable, arbitrary and the procedure followed was not transparent,” he added. 

     

  • TRAI warns Pay Broadcasters against ignoring cost per subscriber in interconnect agreements

    NEW DELHI: All the broadcasters of pay channels have been asked by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India to strictly comply with the provisions of clause 3C of Tariff Order, 2004 and clause 4 of the Tariff Order, 2010 at the time of providing signals of TV channels including in term of Cost Per Subscriber agreements.

    In its direction, TRAI said this was being done “to protect the interest of service providers and consumers” under Section 13, of the TRAI Act 1997, clause 4A of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services (Second) Tariff Order 2004, and clause 10 of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services (Fourth) (Addressable Systems) Tariff Order 2010.

    Following a Supreme Court interim order of 18 April 2011, the rate of a bouquet of channels of addressable systems shall not be more than 42 per cent of the rate of such bouquet as specified by the broadcaster for non-addressable systems. 

    The Authority also pointed out that the Tariff Order, 2010 defines bouquet or bouquet of channels and bouquet rate or rate of bouquet as an assortment of distinct channels offered together as a group or as a bundle. The ‘bouquet rate’ or ‘rote of bouquet’ means the rate at which a bouquet of channels is offered to the distributor of TV channels or to the subscriber, as the case may be.

    The Regulator said that on examination of the information relating to the interconnection agreements filed by the broadcasters under the Register of Interconnect Regulations 2004, the Authority noted that in many cases the agreements are signed in the name of CPS deals between the broadcasters and Distribution Platform Operators (Multi System Operators providing cable TV services through Digital Addressable Systems and DTH operators) for offering of channels of the broadcasters in different formations, assemblages and bouquets for a group or a bundle of channels.

    The Authority in a letter on 1 December 2015 requested the broadcasters of pay channels to clarify the exact nature of CPS agreements being executed with different Distribution Platform Operators and also explain how CPS agreements comply with the existing regulatory framework including the provisions of clause 3C of Tariff Order 2004.

    Most of the broadcasters, in their responses stated that all the channels of a broadcaster are given to a Distribution Platform Operator at a single rate per subscriber per month under CPS agreements. The Distribution Platform Operator pays to the broadcaster on the basis of the number of Set Top Boxes carrying any or all the channels of the broadcaster irrespective of number of channels of the broadcaster actually opted by subscribers.

    Most of the broadcasters in their response stated that CPS based agreements are purely mutually negotiated interconnection agreements and cannot be construed as bouquet of channels and hence do not fall within the realm of’ a-la-carte or bouquet offerings and; since CPS agreements do not fall within the category of a-la-carte or bouquet offerings therefore such agreements do not contravene the provisions of the clause 3C of the Tariff Order! 2004.

    After examining the response of the broadcasters in pursuance of
    the provisions contained in sub-clauses (2) and (3) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004 and the definition of bouquet or bouquet of channels in the Tariff Order 2010, and concluded that this nothing but a bouquet or bouquet of channels being given as an assortment of distinct channels being offered together as a group or as a bundle in the CPS agreements.

    And whereas the provisions of the Tariff Order 2004 and Tariff Order 2010 are applicable to all type of interconnection agreements, including mutually negotiated interconnection agreements, entered between the broadcaster and the Distribution Platform Operators and the definition of bouquet or bouquet of channels in the Tariff Order 2010, the conditions specified in sub-clause (2) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004 are applicable on the CPS agreements signed for an assortment of channels offered together as a group or bundle of channels.

    It stressed that sub-clause (3) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004 was clear that a broadcaster may offer discounts to Distribution Platform Operators on a-la-carte rates of its channels or bouquet rates and such offer of discount in no case will directly or indirectly have effect of contravening the provisions of sub-clause (2) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004.

  • TRAI warns Pay Broadcasters against ignoring cost per subscriber in interconnect agreements

    NEW DELHI: All the broadcasters of pay channels have been asked by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India to strictly comply with the provisions of clause 3C of Tariff Order, 2004 and clause 4 of the Tariff Order, 2010 at the time of providing signals of TV channels including in term of Cost Per Subscriber agreements.

    In its direction, TRAI said this was being done “to protect the interest of service providers and consumers” under Section 13, of the TRAI Act 1997, clause 4A of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services (Second) Tariff Order 2004, and clause 10 of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services (Fourth) (Addressable Systems) Tariff Order 2010.

    Following a Supreme Court interim order of 18 April 2011, the rate of a bouquet of channels of addressable systems shall not be more than 42 per cent of the rate of such bouquet as specified by the broadcaster for non-addressable systems. 

    The Authority also pointed out that the Tariff Order, 2010 defines bouquet or bouquet of channels and bouquet rate or rate of bouquet as an assortment of distinct channels offered together as a group or as a bundle. The ‘bouquet rate’ or ‘rote of bouquet’ means the rate at which a bouquet of channels is offered to the distributor of TV channels or to the subscriber, as the case may be.

    The Regulator said that on examination of the information relating to the interconnection agreements filed by the broadcasters under the Register of Interconnect Regulations 2004, the Authority noted that in many cases the agreements are signed in the name of CPS deals between the broadcasters and Distribution Platform Operators (Multi System Operators providing cable TV services through Digital Addressable Systems and DTH operators) for offering of channels of the broadcasters in different formations, assemblages and bouquets for a group or a bundle of channels.

    The Authority in a letter on 1 December 2015 requested the broadcasters of pay channels to clarify the exact nature of CPS agreements being executed with different Distribution Platform Operators and also explain how CPS agreements comply with the existing regulatory framework including the provisions of clause 3C of Tariff Order 2004.

    Most of the broadcasters, in their responses stated that all the channels of a broadcaster are given to a Distribution Platform Operator at a single rate per subscriber per month under CPS agreements. The Distribution Platform Operator pays to the broadcaster on the basis of the number of Set Top Boxes carrying any or all the channels of the broadcaster irrespective of number of channels of the broadcaster actually opted by subscribers.

    Most of the broadcasters in their response stated that CPS based agreements are purely mutually negotiated interconnection agreements and cannot be construed as bouquet of channels and hence do not fall within the realm of’ a-la-carte or bouquet offerings and; since CPS agreements do not fall within the category of a-la-carte or bouquet offerings therefore such agreements do not contravene the provisions of the clause 3C of the Tariff Order! 2004.

    After examining the response of the broadcasters in pursuance of
    the provisions contained in sub-clauses (2) and (3) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004 and the definition of bouquet or bouquet of channels in the Tariff Order 2010, and concluded that this nothing but a bouquet or bouquet of channels being given as an assortment of distinct channels being offered together as a group or as a bundle in the CPS agreements.

    And whereas the provisions of the Tariff Order 2004 and Tariff Order 2010 are applicable to all type of interconnection agreements, including mutually negotiated interconnection agreements, entered between the broadcaster and the Distribution Platform Operators and the definition of bouquet or bouquet of channels in the Tariff Order 2010, the conditions specified in sub-clause (2) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004 are applicable on the CPS agreements signed for an assortment of channels offered together as a group or bundle of channels.

    It stressed that sub-clause (3) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004 was clear that a broadcaster may offer discounts to Distribution Platform Operators on a-la-carte rates of its channels or bouquet rates and such offer of discount in no case will directly or indirectly have effect of contravening the provisions of sub-clause (2) of clause 3C of the Tariff Order 2004.

  • TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has told the Department of Telecommunications that holding back some of the spectrum in 700 MHz (i.e. 15+15 MHz) from this auction and selling it after a gap of certain period of time from now would lead to non-utilization of this scarce natural resource for that period, though it has the potential to be reused and reallocated.

    Responding to a lengthy note by the DoT on various issues relating to auction of spectrum, the TRAI has by and large stuck to its original recommendations on most questions raised before it.

    It said any delay in award of spectrum or non-utilization of spectrum would turn into irreversible loss to the Government (in the form of levies and taxes) and to the society (in the form of better services, contribution to other related activities etc.).

    Even if it is assumed that greater revenue can be generated by auctioning a part of spectrum in 700 MHz band in future, deferring the revenue receipts now may not be of economic prudence keeping in view the impact of telecom services on the other sectors and overall GDP growth. Telecom connectivity is now the basic infrastructure in any society for networking, conveying important economic and social benefits.

    The Authority emphasised that the broadband connectivity is the first pillar of ‘Digital India’ Programme of the government, which can be fulfilled quickly if sufficient quantity of spectrum is made available. Further, National Telecom Policy-2012 envisages making available additional 300 MHz spectrum by the year 2017 and 500 MHz by the year 2020 for IMT services. If all the available spectrum is put to auction, it will result in increased availability of spectrum which will result in serving larger subscriber base, increased data speed as well as growth and overall increase in economic and other networked activities. This will result in more recurring revenue to the government in terms of license fee, spectrum usage charges, service tax, etc.

    Spectrum being a scarce resource, auction of spectrum is primarily to solve the allocative problem in an open, transparent manner and revenue maximization cannot be (and should not be) the only objective of auction where the Government is an auctioneer. The government has to a strike a balance between its fiscal targets and its responsibility to promote and encourage growth of the telecom sector.

    Presently, India is way behind in the broadband penetration and the internet speeds in the world and 700 MHz band can prove to be a vital band for proliferation of broadband in the country. In view of the above, the authority is of the opinion that entire spectrum in the 700 MHz band is required to be made available for commercial use without any delay. Accordingly, the authority reiterates its earlier recommendation that entire available spectrum (2x35MHz) in the 700 MHz band should be put to auction in the upcoming auction.

    The authority has been in favour of auctioning of all the available spectrum in entire LSA(s). However, the authority had recommended that partial spectrum available in Bihar, Rajasthan and North-East LSAs should not be put to auction till such time it becomes available in at least 75% of total number of districts of the LSA including the state capital(s). As 1.0 MHz of spectrum in 1800 MHz band is available in entire service area of Rajasthan it should be put to auction. Moreover, DoT is carrying out process of harmonisation of spectrum in this band, therefore, issue of partial spectrum may not arise.

    It said telecom service providers feel that the escalation in the number of mobile drops, especially in urban and metro areas, can also be attributed to spectrum related issues, including shortage of spectrum supply. In order to serve the telecom needs of ever increasing subscriber base, the authority has recommended to DoT, from time to time, for making additional spectrum available in existing as well as new bands for commercial use. Further, in all the spectrum auctions held since 2012, the authority has been recommending to put to auction the entire available spectrum with the DoT. I

    As stated in the recommendations dated 27 January 2016, 700 MHz band is a sought after band for LTE deployment around the world due to its efficiency and higher penetration inside buildings. Due to lower frequency, it provides wider coverage which reduces number of towers required for setting up the LTE network and thus significantly cuts down capital expenditure involved in making the network live. In 42 countries commercial networks have been deployed in this band. After the assignment of spectrum in this band in India, it is expected that there will be an accelerated deployment of device eco-system due to ‘economies of scale’ that will be delivered on account of large subscriber base.

    The authority is of the view that if a service provider is not utilizing the administratively assigned spectrum without any justification, the licensor should take back the assigned spectrum.

    The DoT may take the legal opinion on the above issue and start the process of withdrawal of the spectrum separately. As soon as this spectrum becomes available, the same should be put to auction.

    The authority is of the opinion that there is no need for any modification in the provisions of the latest NIA with respect to block size and minimum quantum of spectrum that a new entrant/existing licenses/expiry licensee is required to bid for in 900/1800 MHz band. However, due to limited availability of spectrum in some LSAs in 900/1800 bands minimum spectrum, that a bidder is required to bid for, has been amended in these LSAs.

  • TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    TRAI says it favours auctioning of entire spectrum in any LSA

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has told the Department of Telecommunications that holding back some of the spectrum in 700 MHz (i.e. 15+15 MHz) from this auction and selling it after a gap of certain period of time from now would lead to non-utilization of this scarce natural resource for that period, though it has the potential to be reused and reallocated.

    Responding to a lengthy note by the DoT on various issues relating to auction of spectrum, the TRAI has by and large stuck to its original recommendations on most questions raised before it.

    It said any delay in award of spectrum or non-utilization of spectrum would turn into irreversible loss to the Government (in the form of levies and taxes) and to the society (in the form of better services, contribution to other related activities etc.).

    Even if it is assumed that greater revenue can be generated by auctioning a part of spectrum in 700 MHz band in future, deferring the revenue receipts now may not be of economic prudence keeping in view the impact of telecom services on the other sectors and overall GDP growth. Telecom connectivity is now the basic infrastructure in any society for networking, conveying important economic and social benefits.

    The Authority emphasised that the broadband connectivity is the first pillar of ‘Digital India’ Programme of the government, which can be fulfilled quickly if sufficient quantity of spectrum is made available. Further, National Telecom Policy-2012 envisages making available additional 300 MHz spectrum by the year 2017 and 500 MHz by the year 2020 for IMT services. If all the available spectrum is put to auction, it will result in increased availability of spectrum which will result in serving larger subscriber base, increased data speed as well as growth and overall increase in economic and other networked activities. This will result in more recurring revenue to the government in terms of license fee, spectrum usage charges, service tax, etc.

    Spectrum being a scarce resource, auction of spectrum is primarily to solve the allocative problem in an open, transparent manner and revenue maximization cannot be (and should not be) the only objective of auction where the Government is an auctioneer. The government has to a strike a balance between its fiscal targets and its responsibility to promote and encourage growth of the telecom sector.

    Presently, India is way behind in the broadband penetration and the internet speeds in the world and 700 MHz band can prove to be a vital band for proliferation of broadband in the country. In view of the above, the authority is of the opinion that entire spectrum in the 700 MHz band is required to be made available for commercial use without any delay. Accordingly, the authority reiterates its earlier recommendation that entire available spectrum (2x35MHz) in the 700 MHz band should be put to auction in the upcoming auction.

    The authority has been in favour of auctioning of all the available spectrum in entire LSA(s). However, the authority had recommended that partial spectrum available in Bihar, Rajasthan and North-East LSAs should not be put to auction till such time it becomes available in at least 75% of total number of districts of the LSA including the state capital(s). As 1.0 MHz of spectrum in 1800 MHz band is available in entire service area of Rajasthan it should be put to auction. Moreover, DoT is carrying out process of harmonisation of spectrum in this band, therefore, issue of partial spectrum may not arise.

    It said telecom service providers feel that the escalation in the number of mobile drops, especially in urban and metro areas, can also be attributed to spectrum related issues, including shortage of spectrum supply. In order to serve the telecom needs of ever increasing subscriber base, the authority has recommended to DoT, from time to time, for making additional spectrum available in existing as well as new bands for commercial use. Further, in all the spectrum auctions held since 2012, the authority has been recommending to put to auction the entire available spectrum with the DoT. I

    As stated in the recommendations dated 27 January 2016, 700 MHz band is a sought after band for LTE deployment around the world due to its efficiency and higher penetration inside buildings. Due to lower frequency, it provides wider coverage which reduces number of towers required for setting up the LTE network and thus significantly cuts down capital expenditure involved in making the network live. In 42 countries commercial networks have been deployed in this band. After the assignment of spectrum in this band in India, it is expected that there will be an accelerated deployment of device eco-system due to ‘economies of scale’ that will be delivered on account of large subscriber base.

    The authority is of the view that if a service provider is not utilizing the administratively assigned spectrum without any justification, the licensor should take back the assigned spectrum.

    The DoT may take the legal opinion on the above issue and start the process of withdrawal of the spectrum separately. As soon as this spectrum becomes available, the same should be put to auction.

    The authority is of the opinion that there is no need for any modification in the provisions of the latest NIA with respect to block size and minimum quantum of spectrum that a new entrant/existing licenses/expiry licensee is required to bid for in 900/1800 MHz band. However, due to limited availability of spectrum in some LSAs in 900/1800 bands minimum spectrum, that a bidder is required to bid for, has been amended in these LSAs.