Centre likely to drop some cases on telcos
NEW DELHI: The government may abandon its demand for spectrum charges of about ₹40,000 crore from telecom operators to support the struggling companies.
The latest plan would offer further reprieve to Vodafone Idea Ltd and Bharti Airtel Ltd, adding to the government’s 15 September decision to offer a four-year moratorium on dues and the option to convert dues to the government into equity.
The government on Monday filed an affidavit in the top court stating that the decision to withdraw the batch of appeals against the telcos on spectrum charges is being examined by competent authorities.
The affidavit sought three weeks to inform the top court about the government’s decision to withdraw the cases against telcos. The government affidavit said the sector is experiencing financial stress, and companies are incurring losses despite steps taken by the government to offer relief. The timeframe would allow the Centre to take an informed decision on whether or not to proceed with its set of appeals.
Referring to the steps taken on September 15, the affidavit filed through the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) said the decisions were taken to promote public interest, protect government revenue and encourage competition to avert a monopoly and other adverse
impacts on the economy.
“In the context of these developments, facts, financial position and the implications of the potential result of the captioned appeal, the central government is desirous of reviewing and/or reconsidering its decision to proceed with the present proceedings of appeal. It is submitted that considering the nature of the issues involved, if decision will have to be taken after the scrutiny at various levels which may consume some reasonable time,” according to the affidavit.
The matter came up before a bench of justices M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna on Tuesday when Solicitor General Tushar Mehta apprised the court of the government’s decision to reconsider proceeding with the appeals. The court adjourned the matter to November 17, clarifying that it is not “expressing anything on such proposed action/decision, which might have a larger implication.”