Hardlook: Hello, Hello… Who let the calls drop?

In its consultation paper on compensation to consumers in the event of dropped calls, TRAI notes, “The problem of call drops in the country appears to have aggravated with the passage of time. In order to assess the situation, the Authority, in June/July, 2015, conducted special drive-tests on certain routes of Mumbai and Delhi… it was found that call drop rate of most of the Telecom Service Providers (TSPs) was higher than the benchmark of <=2%, set by the Authority. The issue of too frequent call drops seem to have annoyed not only consumers and businesses but also become a major cause of concern for policy makers and parliamentarians.”

[related-post]

According to TRAI, call drop “represents the service provider’s inability to maintain a call once it has been correctly established”. The objective of this parameter is to provide consumers with an expectation of how successful a mobile network will be at retaining the signal throughout the duration of the call. This parameter for call drops is for both incoming calls and outgoing calls.

One of the main reasons for a spike in call drop rates in the capital is the recent crackdown on “illegal” mobile phone towers by the three Municipal Corporations of Delhi — North, South and East. Dismantling of towers leads to insufficient radio, resulting in termination of calls. The civic bodies and telecom service providers in Delhi have been locked in legal battle since 2011 over the issue of licence fee for setting up mobile network towers. In 2010, the MCDs increased their licence fee from Rs 1 lakh for a period of 20 years to Rs 1 lakh per year (to be paid at the rate of Rs 5 lakh for five years) for setting up mobile towers in their jurisdiction.

The mobile operators under the banner of Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) petitioned the Delhi High Court in April 2011, challenging not only the increase in fee but also that the imposition of any fee or other conditions on the installation of towers is “beyond the purview of the MCD”.

The court struck down the hike in fee and directed the MCDs to provide a “cost-oriented fee” to cover their administrative costs. While the MCDs are still unsure of whether or not they can charge mobile operators, the matter remains in court and the civic bodies continue to dismantle towers that have come up after 2011. The municipality refers to towers that have come up post 2011 as illegal since, it claims, no licence fee has been paid for fresh towers because the amount is yet to be decided by the court.

Meanwhile, the corporations are looking to “provide relief to the people of Delhi suffering from the call drop issue” by providing mobile operators with alternate space to set up towers. Councillors of the ruling BJP have stated in standing committee meetings that while private individuals could make profits from renting out space for mobile towers, why couldn’t the corporations do the same? This contradicts their own position since any tower that comes up without paying licence fee will be deemed illegal, as per its own norms, and as long as the matter remains sub judice, the corporations are not in a position to charge a licence fee.

TRAI is considering to make it mandatory for TSPs to make periodic disclosures about network capacities and steps taken to optimise their networks to address the problem of call drops. “The Authority cannot remain a silent spectator to the problem of call drops encountered by the consumers,” it states.

Ground report on towers: Insiders point to lack of scrutiny, tax wrangle

There are, at present, two ways of constructing cellular network towers in the capital — by acquiring land, and by renting space such as rooftops from individual owners or corporations. However, renting is the most common method for mobile operators and does not involve direct government intervention.

The mobile operator approaches the owner and an agreement is signed between the two parties. Director General, Tower and Infrastructure Providers Association (TAIPA) T R Dua said depending on the need for towers and property rates, rentals could be between Rs 25,000 and Rs 1 lakh.

Resident Welfare Associations state that while a tower in Saket earns rent of approximately Rs 30,000, in Defence Colony
the rates are above Rs 60,000. Sites were sold to mobile operators in Vasant Kunj for as much as Rs 50 to 60 lakh, according to residents of the area.

However, stakeholders claim that contracts with cellular operators are “one-sided”, as they uphold the interests of the mobile operator primarily.

Ashok Kaicker, a Defence Colony resident, has had a mobile tower on his rooftop since 2001. He said the mobile operator could give him three months notice and remove the tower at will, but “I could not do so for 20 years”. Kaicker said after several years of having the tower, “talk of radiation effects began” and he decided to have the mobile operator remove it. “But I was told the agreement was for 20 years and I could not do anything about it,” he said.

Kaicker, however, said he found a loophole in the agreement. “Cellular operators do not construct towers on their own, they outsource it to tower infrastructure companies. So, I was able to point out that my agreement was not with the tower infrastructure company. Now, they are in the process of getting the tower removed from my house,” he said.

Unwilling to be named, civic officials say allegations that there is a lack of proper checking on their part are not always baseless. A councillor alleged, “The building department is providing no objection certificates to structures for towers without asking for requisite certificates.”

Additionally, for a building that has a tower on its rooftop, commercial property taxes are applicable, but officials claim some people continue to pay residential property tax, which is one-fourth of what they should be paying.

What next: On dismantling spree, SDMC picks 102 sites for operators

To tackle the issues of call drops across the city, the SDMC has identified 102 spots in the city it plans to lease out to mobile operators.
Rajan S Mathews, Director General, Cellular Operators Association of India, said such a solution would be acceptable to the telecom operators, but first “we will have to check the viability of the sites offered”.

After telecom operators met state BJP chief Satish Upadhyay this month to try and find a solution for call drops, the civic body has been considering ways to fix the problem. This comes two months after it cracked down on “illegal towers” in the city.

Leader of the House, Ashish Sood, stated the 102 spots identified by the corporation were mostly official buildings such as zonal offices and community centres. “We are keeping schools and dispensaries out of this for now. We are also studying mobile tower policies of other states to explore our options,” he said.

Since then, the civic body claims several towers have come up without due permission. While on one hand the SDMC is demolishing these structures, on the other, it is identifying spots to offer space for towers. It is unclear at what cost the licencing will be done. Mathews had earlier stated “telecom operators will comply with existing norms if they are given sites to set up towers”.

The call drop rate is one of the key performance indicators to assess the performance of telecommunication networks. While most of the TSPs have reported they are meeting the benchmark on call drops, TRAI data shows otherwise. The telecom regulator’s suggestions to address call drops extends from not charging the consumers for dropped calls to compensating them by crediting talk-time or money in their accounts.

Internationally, many TSPs offer a credit of talk-time for a dropped call to consumers. In India, only one service provider has a scheme for crediting talk-time in the event of call drops. The operator provides an acknowledgement of call drop instantly to the subscriber. Within15 to 30 minutes, a free minute is credited in the account of the subscriber.

Noting that the problem of call drops in the recent past “is causing significant consumer dissatisfaction”, TRAI states, “While provision of crediting talk-time in the consumer’s account upon call drop is being envisaged, there may be a need to prescribe conditions and limits governing the credit of talk-time upon call drop in order to ensure fair usage of the credited talk-time.”
The regulator also emphasises mobile network operators will have to take more pro-active measures to curb the problem and make consumer satisfaction a priority.

Meanwhile, COAI has stated, “In the last six months, call drops have increased from 2 per cent to 25 per cent in the city. If they (the civic bodies) come back to us with a reasonable figure, we will be happy to pay it.”

Policy: Common ground eludes service providers, civic bodies

The 53rd standing committee report on information technology, Ministry of Telecommunications and Information Technology, under the 15th Lok Sabha highlights the need for an “enforceable national guidelines for setting up of telecom towers”.

Under the chairmanship of Rao Inderjit Singh, the committee sought opinion from states over the formation of uniform national guidelines for setting up mobile towers. Some states agreed it may be “appropriate” to have model guidelines at national level.

Telecom Service Providers expressed the opinion that guidelines for setting up mobile towers “should be evolved into a National Infrastructure Policy and only items which lie within the purview of the states should be clearly identified for a state-specific policy”.

On the role of civic bodies, the Department of Telecommunications informed the committee that before installation of tower, the telecom service provider/infrastructure provider had to obtain the necessary permission from respective local bodies such as Municipal Corporations/Gram Panchayat Committees. “Each State Government has formulated its own guidelines regarding grant of permission and levy of requisite fee for installation of mobile towers,” the report states.

Tower and Infrastructure Providers Association (TAIPA) in their memorandum to the committee cited some “irrational” provisions laid down by the local municipal authorities. Their points included “exorbitant” fees for permission to install towers and “high” property tax.
The matter over increased licence fee is in court and meetings between mobile operators and municipal corporations officials have been inconclusive, with both not agreeing to each other’s terms.

Officials of the corporation reported having “removed” at least 80 mobile towers in the last two months and sealing over 100.
In July 2015 , the standing committee of the South Delhi Municipal Corporation had sought the “dismantling” of mobile towers which have been installed illegally in South Delhi since 2010.

As per orders of the erstwhile unified Municipal Corporation of Delhi, to set up towers in its jurisdiction, operators have to seek clearances from Airports Authority of India, Delhi Urban Art Commission, Chief Fire Officer, Archaeological Survey of India and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (wherever applicable).

Additionally, structural stability certificates have to be provided for properties on which towers will be constructed. A no objection certificate also has to be procured from the department having administrative control on the building/land where the construction is proposed.

The document states municipal buildings shall be prioritised for setting up of towers and “erection of cell tower on residential buildings shall only be allowed in those cases where no alternative is available”. The document adds, “That cell operator shall be solely responsible for any damage to the building and for public safety.”

For site identification, a recommendation is to be given by TRAI to the effect that the “proposed tower is essentially required at the site/vicinity as the nearest tower of this company is existing at a distance of … metres and no sharing of tower with other company is available.”

Before erection of cell tower, application shall be filed jointly by the owner of the building and the mobile service provider along
with a copy of agreement between the two.

Curated For You

India vs South Africa 2nd T20I Highlights: Quinton de Kock shines as SA beat IND by 51 runs in Mullanpur to square series 1-1

Dilip Kumar’s sisters created ‘hostile environment’ for wife Saira Banu leading to her hospitalisation; ‘orchestrated’ his second marriage to drive her away

‘I slapped Sanjay Dutt, pulled his hair’: IPS officer recalls when Sanjay fell on dad Sunil Dutt’s feet saying ‘galti ho gayi’ after arrest