General

Competition Law And Telecom Sector: Drawing The Line

________________________________________________________________________________

This Blog is written by Shelal Lodhi Rajput from Symbiosis Law School, Pune. Edited by Debargha Mukherjee.

________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

The Initial tracing of telecom sectors can be traced way back to the 19^th century when the Britishers introduced telegraph services in India. Since that time, the evolution in the field of telecom sector has revolutionized in many ways. The past two decades have been the platinum period for telecommunication sector in India. The telecom sector in India has witnessed an unprecedented growth specially in the last decade and with the development in terms of technology, penetration now the telecom sector becomes the prominent sector in multidimensional ways. This development presented us some bog challenges that needs to be addressed by the government and other appropriate bodies. With advent of technology and liberalization, privatization and globalization the telecom sector in recent witnessed an extreme and intense competition over the past decade. The telecommunication sector in India started as a state monopoly. Earlier the telephone service and postal services comes under the ambit of the Department of Posts and Telegraph, especially till 1980’s. To bring crystal clarity and to push the telecom sector in 1985 a separate department named “Department of Telecommunications” the advent of competition brings some new challenges that needs to be addressed by different sectors, there are many problems that arises now from the telecom sector biggest of them is Monopoly. To cater and address all this problem, the legislature enacted Competition law for fair and reasonable business and to create a healthy competitive market in telecom sector. The competition law and economic regulation debate is not new but in the perspective of telecom sector there are some conflict between regulation and competition law in the Indian Telecom sector. In the present time we have witnessed some recent development in the field and the watershed that Jio caused after entering in the domain of telecom sector. To manage different challenges pertaining to telecom sector ranging from monopoly to predatory pricing there are some regulatory bodies for same and also the umbrella legislation of competition law and the competition commission of India is a statutory body to regulate all this.[1]

With the advent of technology and new comers in market of telecom sector and to ensure that the economic development of country continues without any hinderance, the Parliament enacted The in the year 2002 by replacing an existing law that were bought from USA to control unfair trade practices in India. Apart from this there are other regulatory framework that are governing the telecom sector n India, that are sui generis for only the regulation of telecom sector and to keep a check on it i.e.

REGULATING THE COMPETITION REGULATORS

When you have plenty of choices for same thing and you are a consumer then at that time you are satisfied to some extent as you have options to opt in your hand. In the field of telecommunication, you have many options, the pool of options available in mobile call rates, data packages and SMS plans and other value-added services that are enjoyed by the customers. The operators want to cover maximum number of consumers and operators are working on outreach and numbers, to achieve the same they need to lower their prices as on the cost of dropping their revenue. This competition sometimes results in unfair trade practices that are comprises of predatory pricing and creating a monopoly to eliminate a company or rival from market (i.e. Telecom sector). The comes into picture to curb all these problems and to regulate this sector, one of the fundamental functions of TRAI is to facilitate competition and promote efficiency in the operation of telecommunication services so as to facilitate growth in such services. With the coming into power of the Competition Act, 2002 as changed by the , which has now totally supplanted the Restraining infrastructures and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, and setting up of the opposition commission of India the situation about which authority will control rivalry has started. Since the meaningful areas of the Act, for example, those relating to hostile to serious understandings and maltreatment of prevailing position were informed on May 15, 2009, there are no points of reference (at the hour of composing) where the CCI has started an examination or passed any request against a telecom administrator. By the by, debates may emerge when there is a cover of obligations and forces of the on issues relating to rivalry inside the telecom business. Obviously, needs to work relevantly versus controllers set up for explicit divisions. In any case, on the off chance that there is a contention of assessment between the , there is no lucidity concerning whose choice would win.

IMPACT

The competition law and telecom sector in the recent time has time and again faced some special challenges. The main problem of telecom sector that occurred from the inception of the growth in the telecom sector is about the cartel and predatory pricing that were fixed by the players of that sector. This development now created a huge impact on the telecom sector, the inception of competition law had led a watershed in the telecom sector. To tackle this issues the CCI had took plenty of measures, of the Act presents the expression “Predatory Pricing” and states that there will be regarded to be maltreatment of predominant position if an endeavor or gathering legitimately or in a roundabout way, forces unjustifiable or prejudicial costs in buy or offer of merchandise or administration. Clarification to of the Act defines “predatory pricing” as the cost at which products or arrangement of administrations are offered to purchasers and at costs with a view to lessen rivalry or take out contenders. Nonetheless, there is one exemption to this the arrangement, for example on the off chance that such estimating is received to meet rivalry, there will be no maltreatment. As of late, enormous telecom administrators have made claims of ruthless evaluating against new contestants and has been approached to investigate these charges. The telecom division in India has seen exceptional rivalry over the previous decade. The appearance of Reliance Jio and the Vodafone-Idea merger strengthen the precarious rivalry that exists in this division – which powers the market players to ceaselessly improve their exhibition and addition an edge over their rivals. Remembering this foundation, I will allude to two legal choices conveyed as of late where the telecom advertises players have started grumblings against one another for savage valuing and cartelization.

CASE LAWS

The recent controversy that gained prominence in telecom sector is about the Reliance Jio. The case where CCI held that Reliance Jio was not in a dominant position in the sector and was not indulging in predatory pricing.[3]

This case concerned a grumbling recorded by , which entered the telecom showcase in September 2016. Bharti Airtel fought that through the administrations it gave to the client, Reliance Jio was participating in ruthless valuing infringing upon Section of the Competition Act. The administrations conceded by Reliance Jio directly after its entrance into the telecom showcase incorporated a ‘Jio Welcome Offer’ under which information, voice, video and a full bundle of uses were allowed totally liberated from cost to the buyers from a time period initiating on 5 September 2016 until 31 December 2016. Another offer called the ‘Jio Welcome Offer’ offer was propelled at the beginning of the New Year, through which the purchasers could get boundless web information, messages and voice calls till 31 March 2017. The administrations gave by Reliance Jio was the principal administration that would be totally free, without having any thought concerning the volume of system or information utilization. The main contention by Bharti Airtel that this provision of free services amounted to predatory pricing, and was in violation of the Act. To deal with the issue regarding predatory pricing at hand the first determined the ‘Relevant Market’.

Under S of the Act, ‘dominant position’ alludes to a place of solidarity delighted in by a venture in the pertinent market, which empowers it to (a) work autonomously of the usable powers winning in the market, or (b) influence its rivals or customers or the applicable market in support of its. ), one significant factor to be considered while deciding if a venture is in a dominant position is the market share of the venture of the undertaking. In any case, it tends to be contended that Jio can’t be held to be in a dominant position just in light of the fact that it has the most elevated share in the market (or an altogether high market share ), as market share is just one among the numerous components that must be considered. Likewise, while Jio may have seen the biggest ascent in shares of the overall industry, Vodafone-Idea and Airtel keep on staying critical market players, and there exists a three-route split in the market. Besides, Jio no longer offers types of assistance that are totally liberated from cost, and has started valuing its administrations in a serious way. Henceforth, it very well may be contended that, even starting today, Jio can’t be held to be in a dominant situation in the telecom showcase.

ANALYSIS

The drawing line between the telecom sector and competition law is well demonstrated in aforementioned case. The is something that keeps check on some of the most important things if market. There are different laws which affect the telecom business in India, for example, the and the guidelines confined thereunder which bury alia sets out principles under which a mediator (which by definition currently incorporates telecom specialist co-ops, for example, web access suppliers) might be absolved for risk according to outsider connections and substance. The Government additionally tells different guidelines every once in a while, which affect this part, for example, the Anti Spamming Regulations which restrict spontaneous business correspondences sent by means of SMS and require all phone salespeople to enroll under the said guidelines. The Telecom sector is a sine qua non for our work and essential piece of our way of life. The enthusiasm of the shopper must be kept at standard with the development of the business. Keeping one glad at the expense of another will adversely affect the segment in years to come. Along these lines, supporting rivalry inside the segment is urgent. As examined above, there are sure escape clauses and ambiguities in the Act, and in the forces of the . Both the administrative bodies should define limits for themselves and guarantee that they figure out how to make a “pro-consumer business friendly” model for the telecom segment.

The telecom sector and competition law have a very thin line difference between them with the recent developments in the telecom sector and the allegation on government to support Jio gained a prominence and were in talks everywhere. At the same time, it was alleged that government is supporting reliance Jio and fingers were raised at the office of CCI but finally apex court once again clarify all the things and we get to know that Jio is not monopolizing they have just great business plans and the allegations made by Bharti Airtel on Jio about predatory pricing by its offers were rejected by the CCI in a case that was filed by Airtel. The C is a civil legislation and mandates the commission to strictly adhere and follow the principles of natural justice. Some of the main aspects of competition law is to make market a free and competitive place to do business without any unfair trade practices. With the growth in sector the most prominent issue is about the forming of cartel and predatory pricing, he Competition Act, 2002 bandits predatory pricing, regarding it as a maltreatment of prevailing position, denied under section 4 of the Act. Predatory pricing under the Act implies the offer of merchandise or arrangement of administrations, at a value which is underneath the expense, as might be dictated by guidelines, of creation of the products or arrangement of administrations, so as to decrease rivalry or kill the contenders from the market and to earn more profits. Predatory pricing is valuing one’s merchandise underneath the creation cost, so different players in the market, who aren’t predominant, can’t contend with the cost of the prevailing player and should leave the market. The CCI in In [4]. said that “the pith of predatory pricing is valuing beneath one’s expense with the end goal of wiping out an opponent.”

CONCLUSION

The telecom sector has undergone through a major paradigm shift till now and to keep a fair check on the essential regulations in market there are steps that were taken by legislatures at different level, after the enactment of there is an urgent need that were felt by the law makers to frame a more stringent laws to boost up our economy in a fair and reasonable way. The recent developments in telecom sector draws a thin line between the competition law and telecom sector. The main objective behind the enactment of competition Act in 2002 is about regulating the competition in a better way and to overcome the lacunae’s that were come over time after the enactment of

As rivalry in the Indian telecom division keeps on rising steeply, the market players will undoubtedly raise comparable questions against one another later on. Additionally, as the Competition Act, 2002 is a corrective resolution that permits inconvenience of huge punishments, raising a protest for an infringement of this rule turns out as an appealing choice for the opponent market players. The noteworthy ramifications of the CCI’s choice in is that later on it may not be workable for the market players in the telecom segment to effectively make claims that fall inside the ambit of section 4 of the Act as for maltreatment of predominant position. This is on the grounds that, for a section 4 infringement, the endeavor must be in a ‘dominant situation’ in the significant market. As there as of now exists a three-path split in the telecom advertise between Vodafone-Idea, Reliance Jio and Airtel, it very well may be contended that none of these three market players can be viewed as ‘dominant’ with the end goal of Section 4.

Market has consistently been a customer driven plan of action which outfits the capability of the players in a reasonable and sound serious condition. Among numerous different difficulties present, the most significant is to abrogate the arrangement of grouping of intensity. As basic it is for the customer to infer the incentive for cash for the merchandise they need, it is similarly significant that the organizations have a reasonable playing ground to set up themselves as a dependable and reliable substance. While all the rivals in the market have various foundations and financial portfolios, it ought to be comprehended that standards of reasonableness apply to every one of them exclusively. Ruthless Pricing may now and again be executed and considered as a check by the Govt offices to preclude unlawful market elements or strategic policies. Strikingly given the creating issues of the Indian Economy the market is regularly defenseless against new participants who battle to set up themselves, anyway the equivalent doesn’t appear to the case with “Jio” a piece of the aggregate of the Reliance Group of Industries. Figured what may have been showing up as a demonstration of savage estimating, as has been charged by the other significant players in the important market area, it will be intriguing to watch what the course of activities which further go on in the areas of media communications in India.