TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, a statutory and quasi-judicial body was formed by an Act in Indian Parliament to regulate the vast telecom sector. The necessity to form such a regulatory body in line with SEBI, IRDA etc. was felt when the telecom sector was open to private sector. Plainly speaking it’s job could be comparable to an umpires’ of a game field. It has been given the liberty to act without the intervention of bureaucracy or some self-serving politicians, so to speak justice could be meted out to public as well as every telecom operators small or big.
Future will tell whether TRAI could live to our expectations? Can it make justice to public rather than serving the interest of telecom operators? The skirmishes encompassing TRAI came to limelight due to conflict among various telecom operators. That’s exactly the duty of this regulatory body, as has been entrusted with the statutory power, umpiring on behalf of the public for smooth telecom service.
If one reviews the sequence of it’s orders/regulations, chronologically, to various telecom operators and the crucial policy changes with regards to service changes, the monopolistic and arbitrary attitude is clearly visible.
All said and done, the Chairman and members of TRAI should think twice before passing any order for a country having 70 million telephone subscribers. In fact, you will be dazzled to find that they review and modify their own orders every alternate month. Wasn’t it possible for them to closely examine every aspects of a regulation they are going to award, including it’s future implications on the consumers as well as on the operators.
Unfortunately, It’s a matter of concern that INTER CONNECT USAGE REGIME ordered by the same agency is being reviewed again by itself within two month’s of it’s enforcement. But, why within two month’s ? It could have been reviewed before it has been implemented or could have been kept for public perception or operator’s opinion. If an telecom regulator of a country having almost 7 crores telephone connections could act in such a haste manner without taking into consideration of aspects of technical feasibility , accounting, public psyche etc. into oblivion.
Though operators have the requisite expertise technically and financially to provide cheaper telecom service, TRAI is there only to make it costlier. e.g. BSNL and RELIANCE . If they could offer cheaper telecom services themselves, TRAI should not prevent them in the name of ’PREDATORY PRICING ’. Let the Operators rectify themselves if unable to continue with so called cheaper prices . In my opinion ’Floor Pricing’ should not be controlled by the Regulator.
Until recently a 300 ml. Bottle of Pepsi was offered at a price of Rs.9.00, suddenly they made it Rs.5.00, because they could offer it at Rupees Five, whereas manufacturing of the same quantity costs them less than a Rupee.
Companies like ONIDA could offer 14’’ color TV at a price as low as Rs.5000/- on the market today.
One question my friends:
(i)Should the Govt. or any Governmental agency should intervene and prevent the concerned companies to make their product/ services cheaper, against their wishes?
(ii) Whether TRAI is empowered to curb the prices to down sliding much against the interest of consumers arbitrarily?
Few months back Erstwhile Chief of another Regulatory body IRDA, just before his retirement, constituted and funded Rs.10 crore from IRDA pocket and made himself head of the organization for Life, which is under investigation.
It’s appropriate time to review the role of TRAI and other Statutory Regulatory bodies by the public forum and parliament as well, rather than giving it a free reign to act on this way to the tune of certain players.