Call Drop and TRAI

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) told the Supreme Court that private telecom companies were making large profits without facilitating calling feature for their clients, who number in hundreds of crores.

Attorney General (AG) Mukul Rohatgi told a bench of justices Kurien Joseph and RF Nariman that TRAI has to safeguard the interest of 100 crore telecom subscribers. He said the penalty imposed on call drop may not be imposed if private companies provided free calls for every call drop.

As per the TRAI regulation, which has been challenged by the operators, the mobile telecom companies have to pay Rs 1 to a user for every call that ends abruptly due to poor mobile signal, subject to a maximum of Rs.3 per day. The notification was to take effect from 1 January onwards, but has been put on hold till the SC verdict. The Cellular Operators Association of India (COA) has challenged the Delhi High Court order declining to set aside the regulation.

Last week Rohatgi had criticised the telecom companies for investing only 4% in upgrading infrastructure, while they had collected a profit of 48%.

TRAI told the court the companies never agree to any arrangements it suggested compensating the consumers. Rohatgi said the regulator had invited suggestions from the telcom companies and details were uploaded on its website.

“We suggested the service providers to re-credit the time back to the consumers for the call drop, we asked them to give free calls but every time they say it is not feasible,” Rohatgi said.

The AG said a majority of the call drops are due to poor service. “Sixty-five percent of call drops happen due to poor network,” he argued.

“Total of 96 percent of clients comprise of pre-paid customers. Average re-charge per day is Rs 10. More than 60-70 crore people deposit their money in advance with service providers without any interest being paid to them but when we ask these companies to compensate Rs 3 per day for call drops, then they say we can’t do it,” the AG said, defending the regulation.

The line taken by Mr. Rohtagi is absolutely commendable. It remains to be seen what the Supreme Court decides in this case.