Should spectrum for satellite communication be auctioned or assigned administratively? Examine in the light of the Telecommunications Act, 2023.

The Telecommunications Act, 2023 makes auction the default way to assign spectrum. However, its First Schedule reserves satellite services for administrative assignment, meaning allocation without bidding [1]. So the real question is not whether administrative assignment is legal but whether it is priced fairly. On balance, a well-priced administrative assignment serves India better.

Legal framework

• Section 4: spectrum is auctioned except for First Schedule entries such as satellite services, GMPCS and DTH, which are assigned administratively [1][5].
• The Centre can amend the Schedule by notification laid before Parliament, so the choice remains open as policy [1].
• In the Natural Resources Allocation Reference (2012), the Supreme Court held that auction is not a constitutional mandate. Any method is valid if it serves the common good [2].

Case for auction

• Price discovery and transparency: the 2G experience showed that fixing prices administratively can undervalue a scarce public resource [2].
• Level playing field: mobile operators paid large upfront sums at auctions. The big telcos argued during TRAI's consultation that satcom firms should also bid [3].

Case for administrative assignment

• Shared resource: several satellite operators use the same frequency band over the same area at once. Selling exclusive blocks would break up a resource that is used jointly by nature.
• Last-mile reach: lower entry costs make it easier to serve hilly, island and border areas, which advances the goals of BharatNet and Digital India.
• Revenue still protected: TRAI recommended a 4% of AGR charge, a minimum fee and an extra per-subscriber charge for urban users. It also proposed a five-year term, extendable by two, which allows the price to be reviewed later [3].

Implementation gaps

• Spectrum requests from three companies remain pending, and the government has sought clarifications from Starlink on national security grounds [4]. This delay creates uncertainty for investors.
• Security conditions such as lawful interception and gateway control are applied case by case. They are not yet a written standard that every applicant can be tested against.

Overall, the Act's choice of administrative assignment suits the shared, non-exclusive nature of satellite spectrum. The way forward is to finalise the pricing quickly, apply one set of security conditions to all applicants, and use the five-year renewal to revise charges if competition with mobile operators changes. This balances revenue with universal access, in line with SDG 9 (resilient infrastructure).