Competition Commission rejects complaint by BSNL against Indus Towers

Section 4 of the Competition Act relates to abuse of dominant market position

BSNL
A woman speaks on her mobile phone in front of the logo of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL) painted on a wall outside its office in Kolkata. Photo: Reuters
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Nov 13 2018 | 9:58 PM IST

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

The Competition Commission has rejected a complaint by state-owned firm BSNL alleging that Indus Towers abused its dominant market position by denying access to telecom tower sites.

The fair trade regulator disposed of the matter as it did not find any prima facie case of contravention of the Competition Act against Indus Towers, according to an order.

ALSO READ: BSNL rolls out alternate digital KYC process for new connections

BSNL, in its complaint, alleged that Indus Towers abused its position by denying access to its telecom sites (passive infrastructure), which was required to be shared in terms of the Infrastructure Sharing Agreement.

Indus Towers, in its submissions to the Competition Commission of India (CCI), said that it never refused to provide access to telecom towers to BSNL.

The state-owned telecom company is engaged in the business of providing telecom services -- cellular mobile telephone services, across India except Delhi and Mumbai, while Indus Towers is in the business of providing passive infrastructure to telecom service providers and BPOs among others on a sharing basis.

For the case, the Commission considered "the market for the provision of passive infrastructure services through telecom services in India" as the relevant one.

The Commission, in an order dated November 9, said that the "allegation of the informant (BSNL)levelled against the opposite party (Indus Towers), with regard to the denial of access to sites, remains unsubstantiated".

Consequently, the regulator said, "no case within the provisions of Section 4 of the (Competition) Act has been made out ... Accordingly, the matter is ordered to be closed."

Section 4 of the Competition Act relates to abuse of dominant market position.

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Nov 13 2018 | 7:25 PM IST

Next Story