The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has intervened in a high-stakes standoff at the newly inaugurated Navi Mumbai International Airport (NMIA), mandating airport operator Adani Group to facilitate network deployment for telecom service providers. This decisive action, rooted in the landmark Telecommunications Act, 2023, underscores a critical clash between infrastructure commercialisation and the imperative of public utility, impacting millions of air travellers and setting a crucial precedent for India’s burgeoning digital economy. The dispute highlights the complexities of integrating modern digital infrastructure within rapidly expanding physical assets, particularly in a nation committed to pervasive connectivity.
Passengers utilising NMIA have been vocal about the persistent lack of robust mobile network coverage, a fundamental expectation in modern travel hubs globally. This connectivity deficit, particularly concerning private telecom operators, has spurred widespread complaints, signaling a significant gap in an otherwise state-of-the-art facility designed to be a crucial gateway to India’s financial capital. The inconvenience extends beyond personal communication, impacting business travellers, logistics, and the efficient functioning of airport-related services that increasingly rely on seamless digital communication.
Telecom operators, represented by the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI), escalated the matter to government and regulatory bodies following protracted disagreements. Their core grievance revolves around NMIA allegedly demanding "exorbitantly" high charges for deploying mobile infrastructure within the airport premises. Operators reported being asked to pay approximately ₹92 lakh per month per operator. For a typical setup involving four major telecom players, this translates to an astounding annual outflow of nearly ₹44.16 crore, a figure deemed commercially unviable and disproportionate by the industry.
This proposed pricing stands in stark contrast to prevailing rates at other significant Indian airports, sparking concerns over market fairness and potential anti-competitive practices. While NMIA subsequently proposed a reduced charge of around ₹40 lakh per month, aligning with rates at Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL), telcos deemed this still unreasonable given NMIA’s current operational phase and footfall. For perspective, operators at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport, a hub with substantially higher passenger traffic, typically incur charges in the range of ₹10-12 lakh per month for similar infrastructure access. Beyond pricing, telcos also alleged denials of Right-of-Way (RoW) permissions essential for installing their own infrastructure, an accusation NMIA has disputed, asserting that RoW has never been denied to any telecom service provider.
The DoT’s intervention, formalized in a letter to Adani Airport Holdings Ltd on February 16, explicitly designates NMIA as a "public entity" under the recently enacted Telecommunications Act, 2023, and its accompanying Right of Way Rules, 2024. This classification is pivotal, as it fundamentally redefines the terms of engagement between airport operators and telecom service providers. The new legislation aims to streamline and standardise the process of laying digital infrastructure across India, ensuring that essential services are not hampered by arbitrary commercial demands from property owners.
Legal experts underscore the transformative nature of this "public entity" classification for infrastructure such as airports. Neerav Merchant, partner at AQUILAW, elucidated that under the RoW framework, charges are strictly capped. They are limited to modest one-time application fees, reimbursement of actual restoration costs (at government-prescribed rates), and compensation only if telecom use renders the property unusable for other purposes – a rare occurrence for subterranean or overhead cabling. Critically, Rules 7(11) and 9(9) of the RoW Rules expressly forbid any other fees, charges, rent, annuity, entry fee, or financial contributions beyond these defined limits. This interpretation implies that telecom operators possess an inherent right to deploy their own infrastructure on these regulated, transparent terms, free from coercion to utilise any proprietary in-house network.
Athira T.S., associate partner at King Stubb & Kasiva, Advocates and Attorneys, reinforces this view, stating that an airport’s role as a "public entity" shifts it from a commercial gatekeeper to a statutory access provider. Consequently, the airport operator’s recovery is restricted to reasonable administrative and restoration costs directly linked to RoW permission. Pricing, she asserts, cannot be leveraged as a tool to control market entry or to favour a specific deployment model, rendering high monthly per-operator charges inconsistent with the RoW framework unless they pertain to voluntary, value-added services rather than fundamental infrastructure access. This legal interpretation champions the principle of non-discriminatory access vital for a competitive telecom landscape.
To provide context, NMIA has implemented its own in-building solution, functioning as a neutral-host mobile network. This system theoretically allows telecom operators to offer coverage through the airport’s internal network, circumventing the need for individual equipment installations. While such neutral-host models can offer efficiency and reduce clutter, the dispute arises when the terms of access and pricing for this neutral host are perceived as commercially exploitative rather than facilitative, especially in light of the new regulatory framework designed to cap such charges for essential infrastructure.
This dispute transcends a mere commercial disagreement; it touches upon India’s broader ambition of a "Digital India" and the critical role of seamless connectivity in facilitating economic growth, tourism, and ease of doing business. As India’s aviation sector rapidly expands, with passenger traffic projected to soar significantly in the coming decades, the quality of digital infrastructure at its gateways becomes paramount. Unreliable connectivity at major airports not only inconveniences passengers but also hinders operational efficiency for airlines, ground handling, logistics, and the vast array of retail and service businesses operating within airport ecosystems, impacting overall economic productivity.
For telecom operators, the cost and ease of deploying infrastructure are crucial determinants of their investment strategies, particularly as India pushes for a nationwide 5G rollout. Exorbitant RoW charges or bureaucratic hurdles can significantly impede network expansion, especially in high-footfall areas like airports, potentially slowing down the deployment of advanced services and impacting their profitability margins in an already highly competitive market. The Indian telecom sector, characterised by intense competition, substantial capital expenditure, and a focus on subscriber growth, requires a predictable and supportive regulatory environment to effectively expand its digital footprint.
Globally, major international airports often adopt various models for managing telecom infrastructure. Many utilise neutral-host systems, but typically under frameworks that ensure fair, non-discriminatory access and cost-recovery pricing for service providers, sometimes involving public-private partnerships or regulated utility models. For instance, airports in developed economies often have well-established agreements that balance airport revenue generation with the imperative of universal, high-quality connectivity for passengers, aligning with the spirit of the new Indian telecom law. This ensures that while airports can monetise their assets, they do so within a framework that prioritises public access and service quality.
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) is actively examining the pricing concerns, signaling a multi-pronged regulatory approach to resolve the impasse. This concurrent investigation by TRAI, alongside DoT’s directive, highlights the complexity and significance of the issue. The challenge lies in striking a delicate balance: ensuring airport operators receive fair compensation for their investments in infrastructure while safeguarding the public’s right to affordable and ubiquitous connectivity, and preventing any monopolistic practices that could hinder digital access.
Sunil Bharti Mittal, founder and chairman of Bharti Enterprises Ltd, acknowledged the "noise" surrounding the issue but expressed confidence in a resolution. His perspective, voiced at the World Economic Forum in Davos, emphasised the fundamental necessity of serving customers everywhere, citing both the historic Indian Telegraph Act of 1856 and the new 2023 Act regarding right-of-way access. He underscored the need for airport operators to be compensated for their equipment, suggesting a "balance" will ultimately emerge between infrastructure owners’ commercial interests and service providers’ imperative to ensure universal connectivity.
While the dispute continues, NMIA currently offers Wi-Fi connectivity to travellers and access to the state-owned BSNL mobile network, though reports indicate BSNL coverage is primarily available outside the immediate terminal premises. Inside, mobile networks are functional, supplemented by volunteers assisting with Wi-Fi connections, indicating a stop-gap measure rather than a robust, integrated solution. The outcome of this dispute at Navi Mumbai International Airport is poised to create a significant precedent. It will not only shape the operational dynamics between infrastructure developers and telecom providers across India’s rapidly expanding network of airports and other public infrastructure projects but also firmly establish the interpretation and enforcement of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, as a cornerstone of India’s digital future, determining whether India’s critical gateways will prioritise commercial gain over universal digital access or find a harmonious equilibrium.
