“There is no system in the world that has zero call drop,” argued senior advocate Kapil Sibal on behalf of telecom operators during the proceedings of call drop compensation matter heard in the Supreme Court today. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi was representing TRAI.
Sibal further argued that upto 2 per cent call drop is acceptable under TRAI, and unlike other services like electricity, this factor cannot be controlled. He also submitted the various factors that were responsible for call drop: availability of tower, limited spectrum for tower, propagating the signal (how far the signal may go) among others.
Sibal further said that change in frequency spot-900to 1800 frequency, technical glitch, and weather too affect call drop.
During the proceedings, the court asked the senior counsel what the companies meant by interference? “Across the border interference, jammers, air waves, set top boxes, immunity, these are various forms of interference. Hence standard call drop of two per cent is acceptable world over,” Sibal told the court.
The bench of Justices Kurien Joseph J and R.F Nariman asked him whether call drop was an “indirect way” of earning revenue for telecom companies, to which Sibal replied that it is a per second earning, and no revenue is being earned. “If the call drops for one second, he will pay one paisa but will get a compensation of Re 1. What kind of logic is it?, he asked.
Sibal also argued that extrinsic factors are not within the control of operators and they cannot be held liable as it cannot be ascertained whose fault it is for a call to drop.
The court will hear the matter again on March 15.