Reliance Jio, Tata oppose Airtel, Vodafone plea on Trai’s IUC norms in Delhi HC
The counsel appearing for Reliance Jio and TTSL told a bench that they are opposing the petitions filed by Airtel and Vodafone
- Paytm says never shared users’ data with third-parties, government
- Four years of Modi govt: Labour reforms slow down despite policy revamp
- Job creation still a challenge after four years of Modi govt
- Oil prices slump 3% as Opec and Russia consider output boost
- Oil prices drop below $80 vindicates cautious investors trimming bets
New Delhi: Reliance Jio and Tata Teleservices Ltd (TTSL) on Wednesday opposed in the Delhi high court the pleas filed by telecom firms Bharti Airtel and Vodafone challenging Trai’s interconnect usage charges regulations fixing termination charges for landline to wireless as zero paise and wireless to wireless at 14 paise per minute.
Interconnection usage charges (IUC) or termination charges are payable by one telco, whose subscriber makes a call, to another whose subscriber receives the call. The charge is payable by the first for using the second’s network.
The counsel appearing for Reliance Jio and TTSL told a bench of chief justice G Rohini and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal that they are opposing the petitions filed by Airtel and Vodafone.
To this, the bench said, “We felt that all the service providers are on the same footing.”
However, senior advocate P. Chidambaram, who was appearing for one of the petitioners, told the bench that service providers who have less customers are not at “disadvantage” but operators having a large customer base are “suffering” due to the regulation. He argued that the service providers were incurring loss due to termination charges fixed by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) regulation.
“I have incurred huge amount in my infrastructure. If somebody is using my infrastructure and earning revenue, they have to share it with me and I should also get some revenue out of it,” he told the bench during the arguments which would continue on 9 January.
“Bigger network providers are suffering wider disadvantage,” he said, adding, “Sharing the revenue does not mean that somebody will collect the revenue and will not share it with me. Sharing the revenue can never mean 100 on the one side and zero on the other.”
Chidambaram also questioned the power of Trai in fixing termination charge as zero.
Editor's Picks »
- Motherson Sumi continues to face margin pressure in foreign markets
- What the Warren Buffett indicator tells us about market valuations today
- Jet Airways lands with a thud in Q4 as fuel costs increase
- IBC amendments: Some dilutions, and a lot more speed
- Patanjali’s gambit is paying off in toothpaste wars