The Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) has written to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), seeking its intervention on four counts at the newly opened Navi Mumbai International Airport: denial of Right of Way (RoW) permissions to telecom operators, the creation of an exclusive in-building solutions (IBS) arrangement, absence of cost-based pricing for shared infrastructure, and what it describes as misleading public communication on network coverage.
In its submission, the industry body which represents private telecom operators – Reliance Jio, Bharti Airtel and Vodafone Idea, argued that these practices have resulted in a monopolistic bottleneck at a public airport, warranting urgent regulatory scrutiny and corrective directions.
Telecommunications Act Obligations
COAI maintained that NMIAL qualifies as a public entity under the Telecommunications Act, 2023, and is therefore obligated to grant RoW permissions for telecom infrastructure in a transparent, non-discriminatory and time-bound manner.
Airports, it argued, are required to facilitate the deployment of telecom networks, including IBS, to ensure uninterrupted connectivity for passengers, visitors and airport staff.
According to COAI, its member telecom service providers approached NMIAL to deploy their own 4G and 5G infrastructure within the airport premises.
“NMIAL has declined to grant RoW permissions to licensed TSPs. Instead, NMIAL has mandated that all TSPs compulsorily utilise a network deployed by NMIAL or its affiliate, on terms unilaterally determined by it and at charges which are commercially not viable,” COAI said.
Operators have been asked to pay around `92 lakh per month per operator, translating into an annual outgo of more than `44 crore for four mobile operators (including state-owned BSNL).
COAI has argued that these charges are disproportionate to the actual capital and operating costs of deploying an independent IBS network and are inconsistent with RoW rules, which allow recovery only of reasonable operational and restoration expenses.
Monopolistic Infrastructure Control
COAI further pointed out that NMIAL or its nominated entity holds a Category-B unified licence as a virtual network operator, but has effectively positioned itself as the sole provider of in-building telecom infrastructure at the airport.
“In the absence of competitive constraints and cost-based regulation, NMIAL/IBS Operator can impose excessive, non-transparent and non-cost-oriented charges on all TSPs, who have no alternative but to accept such terms if they wish to serve consumers at the airport,” COAI wrote.
The association warned that airports are captive public locations where the absence of alternative infrastructure forecloses competition entirely. In such cases, it has argued, market forces cannot correct pricing or access issues, making regulatory intervention necessary to protect competition and consumer interest.
COAI also highlighted that similar issues are emerging across other public infrastructure projects, raising concerns about wider replication if left unaddressed.