Former DoT official testifies against A Raja in 2G case

Published: 01st August 2012 03:53 PM  |   Last Updated: 01st August 2012 07:41 PM   |  A+A-


Former DoT official A K Srivastava today told a Delhi court that Private Secretary R K Chandolia of erstwhile Telecom Minister A Raja had asked him to stop receiving new applications for 2G spectrum licences once the Unitech group firms submit them.

Deposing before the court as a CBI witness, Srivastava, who retired as deputy director general (DDG) (Access Service) from Department of Telecom (DoT), said on September 24, 2007, Chandolia had told him that Unitech's applications will be submitted to the department on that day itself.

"On September 24, 2007, when about 167 applications were already received, R K Chandolia asked me whether applications of Unitech group have been received. I enquired from dealing section and replied back to him that applications of Unitech group have not been received in the section till then.

"He (Chandolia) told me that applications of Unitech group will be submitted to DoT today and thereafter, I should stop receiving further Unified Access Services Licence (UASL) applications," Srivastava told Special CBI Judge O P Saini.

Srivastava's testimony assumes significance as the CBI, in its charge sheet, had said that in pursuance of a conspiracy to favour telecom firms, Unitech Wireless (Tamil Nadu) Ltd and Swan Telecom, Raja had decided to accept applications filed with DoT till September 25, 2007 only.

Raja and Chandolia, along with others, are facing trial in the 2G case. Three telecom firms -- Unitech Wireless (Tamil Nadu) Ltd, Swan Telecom and Reliance Telecom Ltd are also an accused in the case.

Srivastava, whose statement remained inconclusive today and would continue on August 6, said he had told Chandolia that it was "not possible" to stop receiving applications for UASL after Unitech group submits their applications.

He said Chandolia then asked him to originate a proposal to put a cut-off date on receipt of further UASL applications.

"I told that it was not possible as new applicants have to be given a reasonable time to apply for the UAS licences after a public notice. He (Chandolia) then directed me to originate a proposal in the file to put a cut-off date on receipt of further UASL applications.

"As directed by the PS to the then MOC&IT A Raja, I originated this proposal in the file proposing that we may announce a cut-off date of October 10, 2007 for receipt of new UASL applications till further orders," he said.

Srivastava said he submitted the file to Raja through proper channel and in the evening of September 24, 2007, he again received a call from Chandolia to verify whether Unitech group companies had filed their applications.

He said that he had proposed a cut-off date of October 10, 2007 for receipt of applications for the UASL but Raja on September 24, 2007 decided to keep it to October 1, 2007 in view of pendency of large number of applications.

He said Raja had on October 18, 2007, granted in-principle approval for dual technology to three companies - Reliance Communications Ltd, Shyam Telelinks and HFCL Infotel.

"These three applications were processed as per the policy approved by A Raja on October 17, 2007....

"These three applications were kept pending from 2006 till October 18, 2007 as there was no clarity on the amount of requisite fee for grant of in-principle approval for dual technology. These applications were moved as per the Cabinet decision of 2003 to grant in-principle approval as the licence was technology neutral," Srivastava said.


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp