Attorney General Soli Sorabjee, arguing before the Supreme Court, today offered the mobile phone service providers licence for fixed phones also, to give them 'level playing field.'
However, when the mobile operators told him that the offer should be accompanied by the same terms as given to the private WLL operators, he did not respond.
According to the terms, WLL rate would be much lower than the mobile rate. One of the main arguments of the Cellular Operators' Association of India was that the WLL operators have been treated "better than sons-in-law", as Ram Jethmalani put it.
The Bench headed by Chief Justice G B Pattanaik also observed that the demand for level playing field was not fully considered by the telephone disputes tribunal.
They observed that despite a committee headed by the Prime Minister recommended that this quesiton must be examined, the tribunal's judgment did not adequately deal with it.
The judges again indicated today that if they did not affirm the tribunal's judgment, they would remit it back to the tribunal for reconsideration.
The tribunal, according to them, discussed only the government policy, advance technology and benefits for the consumers.
It did not sufficiently consider the facts and documents placed by the mobile operators.
Since the tribunal is the first court to deal with the dispute, it should have gone into all factual aspects of the controversy, according to the observations of the judges.
The basic operators, represented by senior counsel A M Singhvi, submitted that all factual aspects have been considered by the tribunal.
He said that the mobil operators were shedding crocodile tears when they say that the entry of private WLL operators would ruin them. The arguments will continue tomorrow.
