0G Mobile radio telephone systems preceded modern cellular mobile telephony technology.

Since they were the predecessors of the first generation of cellular telephones, these systems are sometimes retroactively referred to as pre cellular (or sometimes zero generation) systems. Technologies used in pre cellular systems included the Push to Talk (PTT or manual), Mobile Telephone System (MTS), Improved Mobile Telephone Service (IMTS), and Advanced Mobile Telephone System (AMTS) systems. These early mobile telephone systems can be distinguished from earlier closed radiotelephone systems in that they were available as a commercial service that was part of the public switched telephone network, with their own telephone numbers, rather than part of a closed network such as a police radio or taxi dispatch system. These mobile telephones were usually mounted in cars or trucks, though briefcase models were also made. Typically, the transceiver (transmitter-receiver) was mounted in the vehicle trunk and attached to the "head" (dial, display, and handset) mounted near the driver seat. They were sold through WCCs (Wireline Common Carriers, AKA telephone companies), RCCs (Radio Common Carriers), and two-way radio dealers.

[edit] Origins
Early examples for this technology:

Motorola in conjunction with the Bell System operated the first commercial mobile telephone service Mobile Telephone System (MTS) in the US in 1946, as a service of the wireline telephone company. The A-Netz launched 1952 in West Germany as the country's first public commercial mobile phone network. First automatic system was the Bell System's IMTS which became available in 1962, offering automatic dialing to and from the mobile. The Televerket opened its first manual mobile telephone system in Norway in 1966. Norway was later the first country in Europe to get an automatic mobile telephone system. The Autoradiopuhelin (ARP) launched in 1971 in Finland as the country's first public commercial mobile phone network The B-Netz launched 1972 in West Germany as the country's second public commercial mobile phone network (but the first one that did not require human operators to connect calls)

[edit] Radio Common Carrier

Parallel to Improved Mobile Telephone Service (IMTS) in the US until the rollout of cellular AMPS systems, a competing mobile telephone technology was called Radio Common Carrier or RCC. The service was provided from the 1960s until the 1980s when cellular AMPS systems made RCC equipment obsolete. These systems operated in a regulated environment in competition with the Bell System's MTS and IMTS. RCCs handled telephone calls and were operated by private companies and individuals. Some systems were designed to allow customers of adjacent RCCs to use their facilities but the universe of RCCs did not comply with any single

interoperable technical standard (a capability called roaming in modern systems). For example, the phone of an Omaha, Nebraskabased RCC service would not be likely to work in Phoenix, Arizona. At the end of RCC's existence, industry associations were working on a technical standard that would potentially have allowed roaming, and some mobile users had multiple decoders to enable operation with more than one of the common signaling formats (600/1500, 2805, and Reach). Manual operation was often a fallback for RCC roamers. Roaming was not encouraged, in part, because there was no centralized industry billing database for RCCs. Signaling formats were not standardized. For example, some systems used two-tone sequential paging to alert a mobile or hand-held that a wired phone was trying to call them. Other systems used DTMF. Some used a system called Secode 2805 which transmitted an interrupted 2805 Hz tone (in a manner similar to IMTS signaling) to alert mobiles of an offered call. Some radio equipment used with RCC systems was half-duplex, push-to-talk equipment such as Motorola hand-helds or RCA 700-series conventional two-way radios. Other vehicular equipment had telephone handsets, rotary or pushbutton dials, and operated full duplex like a conventional wired telephone. A few users had full-duplex briefcase telephones (radically advanced for their day). RCCs used paired UHF 454/459 MHz and VHF 152/158 MHz frequencies near those used by IMTS.

[edit] Rural Radiotelephone Service

Using the same channel frequencies as IMTS, the US Federal Communications Commission authorized Rural Radiotelephone Service for fixed stations. Because RF channels were shared with IMTS, the service was licensed only in areas that were remote from large Bureau of the Census Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs).[1] Systems used UHF 454 MHz or 152 MHz radio channels to provide telephone service to extremely rural places where it would be too costly to extend cable plant. One such system was on a 454/459 MHz channel pair between the Death Valley telephone exchange and Stovepipe Wells, California. This specific system carried manual calls to the Traffic Service Position System (TSPS) center in Los Angeles. Stovepipe Wells callers went off-hook and were queried, "Number please," by a TSPS operator, who dialed the call. Dial service was introduced to Stovepipe Wells in the mid-1980s. The radio link has since been replaced by cable. The analog service has since been replaced by Basic Exchange Telephone Radio Service, a digital system using the same frequencies 1G (or 1-G) refers to the first-generation of wireless telephone technology, mobile telecommunications. These are the analog telecommunications standards that were introduced in the 1980s and continued until being replaced by 2G digital telecommunications. The main difference between two succeeding mobile telephone systems, 1G and 2G, is that the radio signals that 1G networks use are analog, while 2G networks are digital.

Although both systems use digital signaling to connect the radio towers (which listen to the handsets) to the rest of the telephone system, the voice itself during a call is encoded to digital signals in 2G whereas 1G is only modulated to higher frequency, typically 150 MHz and up. One such standard is NMT (Nordic Mobile Telephone), used in Nordic countries, Switzerland, Netherlands, Eastern Europe and Russia. Others include AMPS (Advanced Mobile Phone System) used in the North America and Australia,[1] TACS (Total Access Communications System) in the United Kingdom, C-450 in West Germany, Portugal and South Africa, Radiocom 2000[2] in France, and RTMI in Italy. In Japan there were multiple systems. Three standards, TZ801, TZ-802, and TZ-803 were developed by NTT, while a competing system operated by DDI used the JTACS (Japan Total Access Communications System) standard. Antecedent to 1G technology is the mobile radio telephone, or 0G.

[edit] History
The first commercially automated cellular network (the 1G generation) was launched in Japan by NTT (Nippon Telegraph and Telephone) in 1979, initially in the metropolitan area of Tokyo. Within five years, the NTT network had been expanded to cover the whole population of Japan and became the first nationwide 1G network. In 1981, this was followed by the simultaneous launch of the Nordic Mobile Telephone (NMT) system in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. NMT was the first mobile phone network featuring international roaming. The first 1G network launched in the USA was Chicago-based Ameritech in 1983 using the Motorola DynaTAC mobile phone. Several countries then followed in the early-to-mid 1980s including the UK, Mexico and Canada.

2G (or 2-G) is short for second-generation wireless telephone technology. Second generation 2G cellular telecom networks were commercially launched on the GSM standard in Finland by Radiolinja (now part of Elisa Oyj) in 1991.[1] Three primary benefits of 2G networks over their predecessors were that phone conversations were digitally encrypted; 2G systems were significantly more efficient on the spectrum allowing for far greater mobile phone penetration levels; and 2G introduced data services for mobile, starting with SMS text messages. After 2G was launched, the previous mobile telephone systems were retrospectively dubbed 1G. While radio signals on 1G networks are analog, radio signals on 2G networks are digital. Both systems use digital signaling to connect the radio towers (which listen to the handsets) to the rest of the telephone system. 2G has been superseded by newer technologies such as 2.5G, 2.75G, 3G, and 4G; however, 2G networks are still used in many parts of the world.

[edit] 2G technologies
2G technologies can be divided into TDMA-based and CDMA-based standards depending on the type of multiplexing used. The main 2G standards are:

GSM (TDMA-based), originally from Europe but used in almost all countries on all six inhabited continents. Today accounts for over 80% of all subscribers around the world. Over 60 GSM operators are also using CDMA2000 in the 450 MHz frequency band (CDMA450).[2] IS-95 aka cdmaOne (CDMA-based, commonly referred as simply CDMA in the US), used in the Americas and parts of Asia. Today accounts for about 17% of all subscribers globally. Over a dozen CDMA operators have migrated to GSM including operators in Mexico, India, Australia and South Korea. PDC (TDMA-based), used exclusively in Japan iDEN (TDMA-based), proprietary network used by Nextel in the United States and Telus Mobility in Canada IS-136 a.k.a. D-AMPS (TDMA-based, commonly referred as simply 'TDMA' in the US), was once prevalent in the Americas but most have migrated to GSM.

2G services are frequently referred as Personal Communications Service, or PCS, in the United States.
[edit] Capacity

Using digital signals between the handsets and the towers increases system capacity in two key ways:

Digital voice data can be compressed and multiplexed much more effectively than analog voice encodings through the use of various codecs, allowing more calls to be packed into the same amount of radio bandwidth. The digital systems were designed to emit less radio power from the handsets. This meant that cells could be smaller, so more cells could be placed in the same amount of space. This was also made possible by cell towers and related equipment getting less expensive.

[edit] Advantages

The lower power emissions helped address health concerns. Going all-digital allowed for the introduction of digital data services, such as SMS and email. Greatly reduced fraud. With analog systems it was possible to have two or more "cloned" handsets that had the same phone number. Enhanced privacy. A key digital advantage not often mentioned is that digital cellular calls are much harder to eavesdrop on by use of radio scanners. While the security algorithms used have proved not to be as secure as initially advertised, 2G phones are immensely more private than 1G phones, which have no protection against eavesdropping.

[edit] Disadvantages

In less populous areas, the weaker digital signal may not be sufficient to reach a cell tower. This tends to be a particular problem on 2G systems deployed on higher frequencies, but is mostly not a problem on 2G systems deployed on lower frequencies. National regulations differ greatly among countries which dictate where 2G can be deployed. Analog has a smooth decay curve, digital a jagged steppy one. This can be both an advantage and a disadvantage. Under good conditions, digital will sound better. Under slightly worse conditions, analog will experience static, while digital has occasional dropouts. As conditions worsen, though, digital will start to completely fail, by dropping calls or being unintelligible, while analog slowly gets worse, generally holding a call longer and allowing at least a few words to get through. While digital calls tend to be free of static and background noise, the lossy compression used by the codecs takes a toll; the range of sound that they convey is reduced. You will hear less of the tonality of someone's voice talking on a digital cellphone, but you will hear it more clearly.

[edit] Evolution
2G networks were built mainly for voice services and slow data transmission. Some protocols, such as EDGE for GSM and 1x-RTT for CDMA2000, are defined as "3G" services (because they are defined in IMT-2000 specification documents), but are considered by the general public to be 2.5G or 2.75G services because they are several times slower than present-day 3G services.
[edit] 2.5G (GPRS)

2.5G ("second and a half generation"[citation needed]) is used to describe 2G-systems that have implemented a packet-switched domain in addition to the circuit-switched domain. It does not necessarily provide faster services because bundling of timeslots is used for circuit-switched data services (HSCSD) as well. The first major step in the evolution of GSM networks to 3G occurred with the introduction of General Packet Radio Service (GPRS). CDMA2000 networks similarly evolved through the introduction of 1xRTT. The combination of these capabilities came to be known as 2.5G. GPRS could provide data rates from 56 kbit/s up to 115 kbit/s. It can be used for services such as Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) access, Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), and for Internet communication services such as email and World Wide Web access. GPRS data transfer is typically charged per megabyte of traffic transferred, while data communication via traditional circuit switching is billed per minute of connection time, independent of whether the user actually is utilizing the capacity or is in an idle state. 1xRTT supports bi-directional (up and downlink) peak data rates up to 153.6 kbit/s, delivering an average user data throughput of 80-100 kbit/s in commercial networks.[3] It can also be used for WAP, SMS & MMS services, as well as Internet access.

[edit] 2.75G (EDGE)

GPRS1 networks evolved to EDGE networks with the introduction of 8PSK encoding. Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE), Enhanced GPRS (EGPRS), or IMT Single Carrier (IMTSC) is a backward-compatible digital mobile phone technology that allows improved data transmission rates, as an extension on top of standard GSM. EDGE was deployed on GSM networks beginning in 2003initially by Cingular (now AT&T) in the United States. EDGE is standardized by 3GPP as part of the GSM family and it is an upgrade that provides a potential three-fold increase in capacity of GSM/GPRS networks. The specification achieves higher data-rates (up to 236.8 kbit/s) by switching to more sophisticated methods of coding (8PSK), within existing GSM timeslots. 3G or 3rd generation mobile telecommunications, is a generation of standards for mobile phones and mobile telecommunication services fulfilling the International Mobile Telecommunications-2000 (IMT-2000) specifications by the International Telecommunication Union.[1] Application services include wide-area wireless voice telephone, mobile Internet access, video calls and mobile TV, all in a mobile environment. To meet the IMT-2000 standards, a system is required to provide peak data rates of at least 200 kbit/s. Recent 3G releases, often denoted 3.5G and 3.75G, also provide mobile broadband access of several Mbit/s to smartphones and mobile modems in laptop computers. The following standards are typically branded 3G:

the UMTS system, first offered in 2001, standardized by 3GPP, used primarily in Europe, Japan, China (however with a different radio interface) and other regions predominated by GSM 2G system infrastructure. The cell phones are typically UMTS and GSM hybrids. Several radio interfaces are offered, sharing the same infrastructure: o The original and most widespread radio interface is called W-CDMA. o The TD-SCDMA radio interface, was commercialised in 2009 and is only offered in China. o The latest UMTS release, HSPA+, can provide peak data rates up to 56 Mbit/s in the downlink in theory (28 Mbit/s in existing services) and 22 Mbit/s in the uplink. the CDMA2000 system, first offered in 2002, standardized by 3GPP2, used especially in North America and South Korea, sharing infrastructure with the IS-95 2G standard. The cell phones are typically CDMA2000 and IS-95 hybrids. The latest release EVDO Rev B offers peak rates of 14.7 Mbit/s downstreams.

The above systems and radio interfaces are based on kindred spread spectrum radio transmission technology. While the GSM EDGE standard ("2.9G"), DECT cordless phones and Mobile WiMAX standards formally also fulfill the IMT-2000 requirements and are approved as 3G standards by ITU, these are typically not branded 3G, and are based on completely different technologies. A new generation of cellular standards has appeared approximately every tenth year since 1G systems were introduced in 1981/1982. Each generation is characterized by new frequency

bands, higher data rates and non backwards compatible transmission technology. The first release of the 3GPP Long Term Evolution (LTE) standard does not completely fulfill the ITU 4G requirements called IMT-Advanced. First release LTE is not backwards compatible with 3G, but is a pre-4G or 3.9G technology, however sometimes branded "4G" by the service providers. Its evolution LTE Advanced is a 4G technology. WiMAX is another technology verging on or marketed as 4G.

[edit] Overview
The following common standards comply with the IMT2000/3G standard:

EDGE, a revision by the 3GPP organization to the older 2G GSM based transmission methods, utilizing the same switching nodes, basestation sites and frequencies as GPRS, but new basestation and cellphone RF circuits. It is based on the three times as efficient 8PSK modulation scheme as supplement to the original GMSK modulation scheme. EDGE is still used extensively due to its ease of upgrade from existing 2G GSM infrastructure and cell-phones. o EDGE combined with the GPRS 2.5G technology is called EGPRS, and allows peak data rates in the order of 200 kbit/s, just as the original UMTS WCDMA versions, and thus formally fulfills the IMT2000 requirements on 3G systems. However, in practice EDGE is seldom marketed as a 3G system, but a 2.9G system. EDGE shows slightly better system spectral efficiency than the original UMTS and CDMA2000 systems, but it is difficult to reach much higher peak data rates due to the limited GSM spectral bandwidth of 200 kHz, and it is thus a dead end. o EDGE was also a mode in the IS-135 TDMA system, today ceased. o Evolved EDGE, the latest revision, has peaks of 1 Mbits/s downstream and 400kbits/s upstream, but is not commercially used. The Universal Mobile Telecommunications System, created and revised by the 3GPP. The family is a full revision from GSM in terms of encoding methods and hardware, although some GSM sites can be retrofitted to broadcast in the UMTS/W-CDMA format. o W-CDMA is the most common deployment, commonly operated on the 2100 MHz band. A few others use the 900 and 1850 MHz bands. o HSPA is a revision and upgrade to W-CDMA UMTS, used by AT&T Wireless, Telstra and Telecom NZ, typically broadcasting on the 850 MHz band. HSPA requires updates to the HSPA+ a revision and upgrade of HSPA, can provide peak data rates up to 56 Mbit/s in the downlink in theory (28 Mbit/s in existing services) and 22 Mbit/s in the uplink. It utilises multiple base stations to potentially double the channels available utilising MIMO principles. The CDMA2000 system, or IS-2000, standardized by 3GPP2 (differing from the 3GPP, updating the IS-95 CDMA system, used especially in North America and South Korea. o EVDO Rev. B is the latest update, offering downstream peak rates of 14.7 Mbit/s. It is used primarily by the US carrier Verizon.

While DECT cordless phones and Mobile WiMAX standards formally also fulfill the IMT-2000 requirements, they are not usually considered due to their rarity and unsuitability for usage with mobile phones.

[edit] Detailed breakdown of 3G systems

The 3G (UMTS and CDMA2000) research and development projects started in 1992. In 1999, ITU approved five radio interfaces for IMT-2000 as a part of the ITU-R M.1457 Recommendation; WiMAX was added in 2007.[2] There are evolutionary standards (EDGE and CDMA) that are backwards-compatible extensions to pre-existing 2G networks as well as revolutionary standards that require all-new network hardware and frequency allocations. The cell phones used utilise UMTS in combination with 2G GSM standards and bandwidths, but do not support EDGE.[3] The latter group is the UMTS family, which consists of standards developed for IMT-2000, as well as the independently developed standards DECT and WiMAX, which were included because they fit the IMT-2000 definition.

History
The first pre-commercial 3G network was launched by NTT DoCoMo in Japan, branded as FOMA. It was first available in May 2001 as a pre-release (test) of W-CDMA technology.[7] The first commercial launch of 3G was also by NTT DoCoMo in Japan on 1 October 2001, although it was initially somewhat limited in scope;[8][9] broader availability of the system was delayed by apparent concerns over its reliability.[10] The second network to go commercially live was by SK Telecom in South Korea on the CDMAbased 1xEV-DO technology in January 2002. By May 2002 the second South Korean 3G network was by KT on EV-DO and thus the Koreans were the first to see competition among 3G operators. The first European pre-commercial network was an UTMS network on the Isle of Man by Manx Telecom, the operator then owned by British Telecom, and the first commercial network (also UTMS based W-CDMA) in Europe was opened for business by Telenor in December 2001 with no commercial handsets and thus no paying customers. The first commercial United States 3G network was by Monet Mobile Networks, on CDMA2000 1x EV-DO technology, but this network provider later shut down operations. The second 3G network operator in the USA was Verizon Wireless in October 2003 also on CDMA2000 1x EVDO. AT&T Mobility is also a true 3G UMTS network, having completed its upgrade of the 3G network to HSUPA. The first pre-commercial demonstration network in the southern hemisphere[dubious discuss] was built in Adelaide, South Australia by m.Net Corporation in February 2002 using UMTS on 2100 MHz. This was a demonstration network for the 2002 IT World Congress. The first commercial 3G network was launched by Hutchison Telecommunications branded as Three in March 2003. Emtel Launched the first 3G network in Africa.

By June 2007, the 200 millionth 3G subscriber had been connected. Out of 3 billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide this is only 6.7%. In the countries where 3G was launched first Japan and South Korea 3G penetration is over 70%.[11] In Europe the leading country is Italy with a third of its subscribers migrated to 3G. Other leading countries by 3G migration include UK, Austria, Australia and Singapore at the 20% migration level. A confusing statistic is counting CDMA2000 1x RTT customers as if they were 3G customers. If using this definition, then the total 3G subscriber base would be 475 million at June 2007 and 15.8% of all subscribers worldwide.

The 2G spectrum scam in India involved the issue of 1232 licenses by the ruling Congress-led UPA alliance[1] of the 2G spectrum to 85 companies[1] including many new telecom companies with little or no experience in the telecom sector at a price set in the year 2001. The scam involved allegations regarding

the under pricing of the 2G spectrum by the Department of Telecommunications which resulted in a heavy loss to the exchequer, and the illegal manipulation of the spectrum allocation process to favour select companies

The issue came to light after the auction of airwaves for 3G services which amounted to 677,190 crore (US$151.01 billion) to the exchequer.[2] A report submitted by the Comptroller and Auditor General based on the money collected from 3G licenses estimated that the loss to the exchequer due to under pricing of the 2G spectrum was 176,379 crore (US$39.33 billion).[3] The scam came to public notice when the Supreme Court of India took Subramaniam Swamy's complaints on record [With Case type:Writ Petition (Civil),Case No:10, Year:2011].[4] it is a very dangerous scam by A Raja. There still many licenses sold from A Raja

[edit] Civil Servants, Politicians and Corporations Involved in scam bad

All the accused have been booked under sections 120(B) (criminal conspiracy), 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) and 109 (abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence, and where no express provision is made for its punishment) of the Indian Penal Code.[5]
[edit] Politicians, Ministers and Parliamentarians involved

Andimuthu Raja, Union Cabinet Minister for Communications and Information Technology : The Comptroller and Auditor General holds Raja personally responsible for the sale of 2G spectrum at 2001 rates in 2008, resulting in the previously mentioned loss of up to Rs. 1.76 lakh crores (US$40 billion) to the national exchequer.[6] In August, 2010, evidence was submitted by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) showing that Raja had personally signed and approved the majority of the questionable allocations.[7]

Kanimozhi Aravindhan, Member of Rajya Sabha : On April 25, 2011 Kanimozhi was named as a co-conspirator in the supplementary chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the 2G spectrum case. The chargesheet submitted before the Supreme Court establishes how Rs 200 crore connected with the scam traveled from a partnership firm of businessman Shahid Balwa of Swan Telecom to the Karunanidhi family-owned Kalaignar TV.[5] She has been charged with section 7 and 11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The sections deal with acceptance of alleged gratification.[8]

[edit] Bureaucrats involved

Siddhartha Behura, Civil Servant (IAS officer of 1973 batch UP cadre) : He was the Telecom secretary who served in the DOT at the time of the 2G allocation. Pradip Baijal, Civil Servant (IAS officer of 1966 batch MP cadre) : He is alleged to have recommended policies that favored certain Telecom companies when he was heading the TRAI. Post retirement, Baijal joined Noesis, a consulting firm.[9][10] Raja has made references to Baijal's decisions in 2003 as the basis for his decisions in 2008; something which has been attacked by Arun Shourie and several media pundits. The houses and offices of the bureaucrat were recently[when?] visited by the Central Bureau of Investigation as part of their investigations.[11] However, Baijal is expected to get a clean chit in this issue [12] R K Chandolia, Civil Servant (IES officer of 1984 batch cadre) : He was private secretary of Raja during UPA-I when the licences were awarded. When Raja became the Telecom Minister once again in UPA-II, Chandolia had been promoted to the Joint Secretary rank. Raja re-designated him Economic Adviser, that gave him the charge of all important policy-related work. Chandolia interacted with all the licensees. It is said that it was Chandolia who, from DDG-access services A K Srivastava's room, had handed out letters of intent to representatives of various companies.[13]

[edit] Corporations involved

Allianz Infra[14] Aircel Dishnet Wireless Loop Mobile Sistema Shyam Mobile (MTS) Sistema Mobile Russia Reliance Communications S Tel Swan Telecom Tata Tele Services Unitech Group Videocon Telecommunications Limited Vodafone Essar Virgin Mobile India

[edit] Corporate personalities involved

Anil Ambani - Reliance Group (ADAG)[15] Ratan Tata Shahid Balwa - Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB)

Vinod Goenka - Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB) Venugopal Dhoot - Videocon Group Prashant Ruia - Essar Group Sanjay Chandra, Managing Director of Unitech Ltd and Unitech Wireless

All of them have either been questioned by the CBI or are prospective suspects in the scam.
[edit] Media persons and lobbyists involved

Nira Radia, a former airline entrepreneur turned corporate lobbyist whose conversations with politicians and corporate entities were recorded by the government authorities. The contents were later leaked by unknown parties creating the Nira Radia tapes controversy

[edit] Politicans, Ministers and Parlimentarians involved

Dayanidhi Maran, former Union Cabinet Minister for Textiles : The main allegation revealed by Tehelka magazine and followed up in several other reports, is that Maran forced C Sivasankaran, owner of Aircel, to sell the telecom company to Maran's Malaysia-based friend T Ananda Krishnan in 2006. The reports allege that Maran deliberately delayed issuing spectrum licenses to Aircel's sister concern, Dishnet Wireless, when it was owned by Sivasankaran. He issued the licenses soon after it changed hands to Ananda Krishnan who owns Maxis.[16] P. Chidambaram, current Union Cabinet Minister for Home Affairs : Subramaniam Swamy states that when the 2G Spectrum rate was finalised, P.Chidambaram was the finance minister of India and he had a major role in deciding the spectrum price with A.Raja. Subramaniam alleges that Chidambaram had received kickbacks and undervalued the spectrum cost.[17]

[edit] Petitioners to 2g scam

Subramaniam Swamy, activist lawyer and politician, whose letters to the Prime Minister demanding action and affidavits and cases in the Supreme Court brought the issue into the public limelight. Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, a journalist who was one among the very first to write on the irregularities in the awarding of 2G spectrum allocation by the Telecom Ministry. He is also one of the petitioners in the 2G PIL currently being heard in the Supreme court.[18] Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of the Centre for Public Interest Litigation. Anil Kumar, on behalf of the civil society organisationTelecom Watchdog Others:Several eminent people like former chief election commissioners J.M. Lyngdoh, T.S. Krishnamurthy and N. Gopalaswami and former central vigilance commissioner (CVC) P. Shankar are also petitioners in the suits filed by civil society groups.[14]

[edit] Loss to Exchequer

The Controller and Auditor General of India used three different methods to assess the presumptive loss to the exchequer resulting from not auctioning 2G spectrum. [19]

The first method was based on the fact that S Tel, one of the licensees, explicitly offered to pay significantly higher license fees for the spectrum. Based on the fees offered by S Tel, the CAG estimated the loss to the exchequer at 67,364 crore (US$15.02 billion) The second method was based on the price recovered by the 3G auction in 2010. The CAG reasoned that since 2G is really 2.75G (EDGE), its price should be comparable to that of 3G licenses. Based on this method, the CAG estimated the loss to the exchequer to be 176,000 crore (US$39.25 billion) The third method was based on the fact that some of the licensees received FDI in the form of equity, shortly after the spectrum allocation. The CAG reasoned that this equity infusion was entirely due to the value of the allocated spectrum; this can be construed as re-sale of the spectrum by the licensee, and hence was a valid basis for assessing loss to the exchequer. Based on this method, the CAG estimated the loss to the exchequer to be anywhere between 57,666 crore (US$12.86 billion) (based on Etisalat's investment in Swan Telecom) and 69,626 crore (US$15.53 billion) (based on Telenor's investment in Unitech). For its part, the Congress-party led government has publicly defended itself on this count and Kapil Sibal, who replaced A. Raja as the communication minister, has refuted the CAG reasoning.[20] He has also justified his government's decision not to auction 2G spectrum as being in line with the policy guidelines laid down by the 10th Five-Year Plan.[21][22]

[edit] Relationship between media and government

Main article: Nira Radia tapes controversy

Media sources such as OPEN and Outlook reported that Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi knew that corporate lobbyist Nira Radia was influencing the decisions of A. Raja.[23] The critics alleged that Dutt and Sanghvi knew about corruption between the government and the media industry, supported this corrupt activity, and suppressed news reporting the discovery of the corruption. [23]
[edit] Ratan Tata petitions over leak

The tapes leaked to the public include conversations between Nira Radia and Ratan Tata. Tata petitioned the government to acknowledge his right to privacy and demanded accountability for the leak, with the Minister for Home Affairs, CBI, Indian Income Tax Department, the Department of Telecommunication, and the Department of Information Technology as respondents in the petition.[24] On April 4, 2011 Indian Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC)questioned Tata Sons Chairman Ratan Tata and corporate lobbyist Niira Radia regarding their roles in 2G Scam. [25]

[edit] Response to scam

In early November 2010 Telecom Minister A Raja resigned.

In mid November the controller Vinod Rai issued show-cause notices to Unitech, S Tel, Loop Mobile, Datacom (Videocon), and Etisalat to respond to his assertion that all of the 85 licenses granted to these companies did not have the up-front capital required at the time of the application and were in other ways illegal.[26] Some media sources have speculated that these companies will receive large fines but not have their licenses revoked, as they are currently providing some consumer service.[26] In response to the various allegations, the Govt of India has replaced the then incumbent Telecom minister, A. Raja with Kapil Sibal who has taken up this charge in addition to being the Union minister for Human Resources Development.Mr Sibal contends that the "notional" losses quoted are a result of erroneous calculations and insists that the actual losses are nil.[20][21] The CBI conducted raids on Raja and four other telecom officials - former telecom secretary Siddharth Behura, Raja's personal secretary R K Chandolia, member telecom K Sridhar and DoT deputy director general A K Srivastava on 8 December 2010.Kanimozhi, DMK MP and Karunanidhi's daughter, was arrested and sent to Tihar jail by a Delhi court which dismissed her bail plea in the 2G spectrum scam, saying there was a possibility of witnesses being influenced considering the "magnitude" of the crime.[27]

[edit] Arrests and Chargesheets

On February 2, 2011, the Central Board of Direct Taxes arrested former Telecommunications Union Minister Andimuthu Raja. The CBDT also arrested R.K. Chandolia, Raja's personal aide, and Siddharth Behura, the former Telecom Secretary.[28][29] Both Raja and Chandolia are heard in conversation with Niira Radia in the released Radia tapes. On February 8, 2011, the CBI arrested Mumbai based Dynamix Balwas (DB) group managing director Shahid Usman Balwa in connection with the 2G spectrum allocation scam. The CBI has evidence from the Income Tax department that Shahid Usman Balwa, considered close to Raja, was instrumental in channelling the kickbacks allegedly received by the former telecom minister.[30] On March 29, 2011, in Delhi, the CBI arrested Asif Balwa (younger brother of the arrested former Managing Director of DB-Etisalat Group, Shahid Balwa) and Rajeev Agarwal for their alleged involvement in money transfer to the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam's (DMK) Kalaignar TV channel.[31] On April 2, 2011, the CBDT filed its first 80,000 page chargesheet in the 2G spectrum scam before a Special Court in Delhi naming nine individuals and three companies. It said the wrongful acts of the accused deprived the government exchequer of possible revenues amounting to INR Rs 30,985 crore (USD $ 6,983,322,233). The accused include the following individuals:[32]
1. Andimuthu Raja, former Telecom minister 2. Siddharth Behura, former Telecom Secretary 3. R.K. Chandolia, Raja's former personal secretary

4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Shahid Usman Balwa, former Director of Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB) Sanjay Chandra, Managing Director of Unitech Ltd and Unitech Wireless Gautam Doshi, Group MD, Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group Hari Nair, Senior Vice-President, Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group Surendra Pipara, Senior Vice-President, Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group and Reliance Telecom Ltd 9. Vinod Goenka, Director, Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB)

The three companies named are:

1. Swan Telecom 2. Unitech Wireless 3. Reliance Telecom

In the first chargesheet, the CBI had named lobbyist Niira Radia and 124 others as witnesses. On 25 April 2011, in its second chargesheet in the scam, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) named five more accused individuals:[33]
1. Kanimozhi - Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament (DMK) and daughter of Tamil Nadu ex-Chief Minister M Karunanidhi 2. Sharad Kumar of Kalaignar TV 3. Karim Morani of Cineyug Films 4. Asif Balwa of Kusegaon Realty 5. Rajiv B Agarwal of Kusegaon Realty

On 20 May 2011, Special CBI Judge O P Saini of the Delhi court ordered the arrest of DMK Member of Parliament Kanimozhi and Kalaignar TV Managing Director Sharad Kumar after rejecting their bail pleas in the 2G spectrum case.[34]

[edit] P.A.C. (Public Accounts Committee)

Public Accounts Committee, a 21-member committee, with chairman as Murli Manmohar Joshi, was formed to investigate, independent of other committees like JPC. The chairman submitted a draft report on 2G scam to Lok Sabha Speaker on Saturday 30-04-2011, and insisted that it be tabled in the Parliament. UPA members' claimed that the report had been "rejected", and 11 MPs of same committee(majority out of 21) had "rejected" the report - which was termed as "unconstitutional" by MM Joshi pointing out that such a possibility does not exist till the report is "read" by members and "discussed" para by para. Defending his action of calling witnesses from diverse fields in connection with the 2G scam probe, Joshi said it was the duty of the PAC to "trace and examine the way the money of common man is spent". He alleged that on 28-042011, during the last meeting of the committee, ministers passed on "chits" and called up PAC members to speak and behave in a particular manner; that said trouble started when a decision was taken to call top officials of the PMO, Cabinet Secretary, Attorney General and CBI director for questioning. A minister reportedly commented that the PAC draft report will be thrown in the dustbin, to which the chairman regretted and questioned if Parliament's proposals and then Supreme Court orders would be given the same treatment.[35]

[edit] Impact on stock markets

The first casualty in Stock Markets once Raja was arrested was DB Realty.[36] 20% fall in the stock prices of DB Realty. Sun TV had its shares fall by 10%.[37] Sun TV COO refused the allegations. Swan Telecom Chief Balwa was arrested on Feb 8 [38] and this led to rumours of links with Anil Ambani's Reliance ADAG and it led to 20% fall of his stocks . Its reported that nearly 2 Billion USD was eroded from his stocks .[39] Spicejet stocks went down after reports of investigation on Maran's recent takeover of Spicejet .[40]

What is 2G spectrum scam?

New Delhi: From the time allegations of misappropriation during the bidding for allocation of 2G spectrum surfaced, till Telecom Minister A Raja's ouster, high drama charged both politics in Delhi and Tamil Nadu. So what exactly is the Spectrum Scam that led to all this? WHAT IS SPECTRUM SCAM?

2G licenses issued to private telecom players at throwaway prices in 2008 CAG: Spectrum scam has cost the government Rs. 1.76 lakh crore CAG: Rules and procedures flouted while issuing licenses

WHAT ARE THE CHARGES ON FORMER TELECOM MINISTER A RAJA? CHEAP TELECOM LICENSES

Entry fee for spectrum licenses in 2008 pegged at 2001 prices Mobile subscriber base had shot up to 350 million in 2008 from 4 million in 2001

NO PROCEDURES FOLLOWED

Rules changed after the game had begun Cut-off date for applications advanced by a week Licenses issued on a first-come-first-served basis No proper auction process followed, no bids invited Raja ignored advice of TRAI, Law Ministry, Finance Ministry TRAI had recommended auctioning of spectrum at market rates

FAVOURITISM, CORPORATES ENCASH PREMIUM

Unitech, Swan Telecom got licenses without any prior telecom experience Swan Telecom given license even though it did not meet eligibility criteria Swan got license for Rs. 1537 crore, sold 45% stake to Etisalat for Rs. 4200 crore Unitech Wireless got license for Rs. 1661 crore, sold 60% stake for Rs. 6200 crore All nine companies paid DoT only Rs. 10,772 crore for 2G licences

OTHERS IN THE NET

DMK chief M Karunanidhi's daughter and MP Kanimozhi who has been named by the CBI as a co- conspirator with A Raja Shahid Balwa, the promoter of Swan Telecom, who the CBI believes had a central role in the 2G spectrum scam. He has been accused of colluding with former Telecom Minister A Raja by allegedly channelising kickbacks Raja got from the spectrum sale into the real estate Unitech chief Sanjay Chandra and DB Realty founder Vinod Goenka who have been chargesheeted for cheating and conspiracy Three senior executives of Anil Ambani controlled ADAG, Gautam Doshi, Hari Nair and Surendra Pipara. All these are currently lodged in Tihar Jail Former telecom secretary Sidharth Behura, who allegedly shut counters to physically block other telecom companies, faces the same charges as Raja. And so does Raja's Personal Secretary RK Chandolia

THE ROLE OF KALAIGNAR TV One of the companies named by the CBI in the 2G scam - Swan Telecom - allegedly sent Mr Raja a Rs. 214-crore kickback that was routed through a maze of companies but rested finally with Kalaignar TV channel in Chennai that is owned mainly by Kanimozhi and Dayalu Ammal. Together, they have 80% stake in the company. Sharad Kumar, the Managing Director of Kalaignar TV, owns the balance and has also been accused of conspiring with Mr Raja.

What is the 2G scam all about?

The 2G spectrum licences allocation scandal is one of several to have emerged in the past few months, tarnishing the reputation of Prime Minister Manmohan Singhs government

New Delhi: A court on Wednesday put on trial the first set of officials and businessmen indicted in the countrys biggest corruption case, a multi-billion dollar telecom scandal that has weakened the government and put off some foreign investors. The 2G spectrum licences allocation scandal is one of several to have emerged in the past few months, tarnishing the reputation of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, whose government has gone on the defensive against an emboldened opposition. While corruption itself has been largely shrugged off by investors, the regulatory uncertainty from the review of past government decisions is a source of concern to investors. Present at the hearing are former telecom minister Andimuthu Raja as well as officials from the Indian joint ventures of Norwegian telecom firm Telenor and the United Arab Emirates Etisalat . Three executives from Reliance ADA, owned by Indian billionaire Anil Ambani, are also on trial in the case which police investigators said involved awarding companies valuable telecom licences at rock-bottom prices. The state auditor Comptroller Auditor General (CAG) estimates the scam to have cost the government up to $39 billion in lost revenue. Here are some questions about the scandal: What is this all about? Police say that millions of dollars were paid in bribes to ensure favours for certain firms in 200708 when India issued 122 new licences to offer mobile phone services in the worlds fastest growing telecom market. The CAG estimated India may have lost up to $39 billion in revenue -- equivalent to the defence budget -- due to violations during the allocation process. Several licences were issued to firms who were ineligible, or who had no prior experience in the sector, or who had hid material facts while applying, the auditor said. The telecom ministrys process of issuing licences lacked transparency and was undertaken in an arbitrary, unfair and inequitable manner, the auditor said. What are the charges? Police have charged the accused of cheating, conspiracy and other crimes. The accused include Sanjay Chandra, the managing director of Telenors India partner Unitech and Shahid Balwa, the vice chairman of Etisalats India operations.

Raja is also accused of taking bribes to favour the local partners of Telenor and Etisalat. Investigators say the bribes were routed through a television channel run by Rajas DMK party, a key member of the ruling coalition led by Singhs Congress party. All the accused deny any wrongdoing. Telenor and Etisalat say the events described occurred before they invested in India. What is the fallout? The scandal has tarnished the Congress-led UPA governments image, spooked investors and has led to the Norwegian Prime Minister writing to his Indian counterpart seeking fair treatment for Telenor. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was reprimanded by the Supreme Court for not acting quickly enough against Raja and the opposition all but shut down an entire Parliament session demanding a joint parliamentary committee (JPC) to probe the scandal. The government gave in to that demand. A separate parliamentary committee PAC (public accounts committee) is also investigating the graft scandal. PAC last week summoned Ratan Tata and Anil Ambani -- two of Indias most high-profile businessmen -- to answer questions on the licence allocations. The telecom ministry is considering whether to cancel 85 licences issued in 2008, including those held by Telenor and Etisalat. The scandal could dent Congress chances in Wednesdays elections in Tamil Nadu, which is ruled by the DMK, as voters may decide to punish it over the role senior party member Raja played in the corruption scandal. What does this mean for investment in India? Regulatory uncertainty is worrying investors, as so many business deals are being investigated and there is the possibility that some may be scrapped. This concern has hit the stock market, which ended the March quarter as the worlds worst performer. If the telecom ministry does decide to cancel some or all of the 85 licences it is scrutinizing, questions will be raised over whether foreign investors can trust Indian government contracts. Norways PM has said Telenor should not be penalized for errors others have committed in India.

It is early to say whether licences will be cancelled, but pressure will be on the government not to do so because operators have invested millions of dollars in rolling out networks and cancelling them will inconvenience subscribers.

2G Scam: Power of having big "Surname" in India like Tata, Birla and Ambani Recent scams in India not only tell about the free loot of scarce resources but also show the power of having big Surnames like Tatas, Birlas and Ambanis. It seems that India has been taken over by corrupt politicians in alliance with corrupt bureaucrats and businessmen. Number of PSUs (Balco, VSNL, Modern Food, Hindustan Teleprinters, etc.) has been divested at throwaway prices. Since liberalization from Licence Permit Raj, few industrial houses managed by people having big Surnames, have grown exceptionally by exploiting India's scarce resources, be it mines, oil, land, ports or spectrum, in alliance with the political masters. Small and medium entrepreneurs are going out of business, because of monopoly created by established industrial houses by lobbying with the government. When public becomes angry over revelations of such scandals, the strategy often employed is to start targeting second-tier selectively while protecting top-tier who can buy India democracy with the vast wealth gained by corruption. Recent example is 2G spectrum scam. When things were going as per the whims and fancies of Tatas, Birlas and Ambanis in telecom sector, there was no scam and no inquiry from CBI, ED, Income Tax, PAC or JPC. The moment new players entered in this sector, they were killed by these big people with the support of Indian beaurocratic system. People know that big corporate houses, like Ambanis, Tatas and Birlas, not only control the government but also play a major role in the formation of government and allocation of ministries, as apparent from the Radia leaked tapes. TATA Lets start with Tata first who has been shown as victim of DMK leader A. Raja policies in the CBI first chargesheet. Surprisingly, in the same chargesheet, CBI estimated loss of Rs.8,448.95 crores to the exchequer from Tatas dual technology licenses. Tata not only got 19 dual technology licenses but also got 3 new licenses in 2008 at 2001 price for which loss to the exchequer is estimated to Rs.22,535.6 crores. Till recently, two senior DMK leaders (PV Kalyanasundaram and VRS Sampath) were helping Tata by acting as director in Tata Communications. A. Raja considered Tata applications for dual technology licenses even though these applications were filed after last date. It shows, Tata was the biggest beneficiary of A. Raja policies and major contributor of loss to the exchequer claimed by CBI in its chargesheet. Tatas hand-written letter of November 13, 2007 (delivered personally through Niira Radia) to the then Tamil Nadu Chief Minister praising A. Rajas action defies the CBI story of Tata as victim. In this letter, Tata had complained about some powerful vested interest groups in the telecom industry but Tata had forgotten that he is also part of the same class. For this reason only, Tata got a clean chit in Unitech-Tata Realty deal and Voltas land deal with Karunanidhi family, and on the contrary, shown as victim. When unsecured loan from DB Realty to Kalaignar TV can be quid pro quo, then why not Voltas land deal?

Recently, Tata regretted that his conglomerate couldn't enter the growing aerospace industry in India because his attempts to enter the segment were thwarted by corruption. Why is Tata complaining now in November 2010? Why he is not disclosing the names of the 3 Prime Ministers he approached and the minister who asked bribe from him? Why had he not filed any complaint against such minister if he really wanted to remove corruption? Does it mean that all private aviation operators are part of corruption or is he trying to show that Tata has created a big empire without being part of corruption? If it is true, why does Tata need to hire corporate lobbyist Niira Radia? Surprisingly, CBI had failed to unearth anything incriminating against Niira Radia whose leaked conversations with assorted bigwigs have riveted the nation. BIRLA Idea Cellular (Aditya Birla Group company) was also issued 9 GSM licenses in 2008 at 2001 price and accordingly, it has also contributed in the loss to the exchequer like others. But, CBI has found no evidence against Idea Cellular to prove any wrongdoing may be, because Idea Cellular is owned by Birlas or CBI is not sure about its calculation of loss to the exchequer. CBI also failed to investigate Idea-Tata connection (like Swan-Reliance connection) when it applied for license in Mumbai circle. Idea applied for this license in August 2005 when Tatas were providing telecom services in Mumbai and also holding more than 10% stake in Idea. Instead of rejecting Ideas application (being in violation of Indian telecom rules), DoT favoured Birlas by putting this application on hold till Tatas exited the company in 2006. Now, CBI is favouring Birlas by saying that its application for Mumbai circle was kept in abeyance for 6-month period to comply with DoT rule. While giving this clean chit, CBI has failed to check that there is no provision in DoT guidelines to keep the applications in abeyance. AMBANI In 2003, Reliance and Tata (fixed line operators) were allowed to offer mobile phone services, at first in the limited WLL mode (Wireless local loop) and later full mobility without paying the hefty fees paid by the earlier operators. Apart from Tata, the biggest beneficiary of change in policy was Ambanis Reliance Infocomm who gained thousands of crores of spectrum without paying a dime in additional license fees, and the then telecom minister are reported to have received benami shares of Reliance Group companies as a gift. Again in 2007, Ambani also got dual technology licenses (like Tata) in 2007 at 2001 price and that too, a day before the announcement of policy, therefore causing loss to the exchequer going by the CBI understanding. None of the companies which have got dual technology licenses, has been booked so far by CBI. In fact, for Swan-Reliance connection, CBI has made small employees of Ambani as accused and kept him out of its loop despite having a statement of ICICI bank manager that only Anil Ambani and his wife were entitled to sign big cheques. Even otherwise, it is unbelievable that these small employees were authorized to take decisions worth thousands of crores of rupees without taking permission of Ambani. CBI has closed its mind on a question whether these employees were the beneficiaries? RUIA Coming to Ruias who have recently sold balance 33% stake in Vodafone-Essar to Vodafone for a whopping amount of USD 5 billion. The Ruias are under CBI scanner as they suspect Essar of using Khaitans as a front for ownership in Loop Telecom. Current regulations prevent any entity

from holding beyond 10% stake in more than one company in a circle. Essar was holding 33% stake in Vodafone-Essar when it applied for telecom licenses again through Loop. But it appears that CBI is not able to get hold of Ruias because of their name and fame. CBI in March 2011 admitted before the Supreme Court that first chargesheet shall be filed in April 2011 against 2 companies - MD of one company is already in custody and second company is linked to Vodafone. But suddenly, Ruias managed to keep themselves out of the first chargesheet. Till date, no one from Essar or Loop has been booked by CBI despite having a written compliant from Indian High Commissioner to Mauritius, Madhusudan Ganapati, against Prashant Ruia and I. P. Khaitan, saying that both Ruia and Khaitan came to meet him under the pretext of discussing the business environment in Mauritius but ended up asking him to share details on the Letter Rogatory sent by CBI to the Mauritius government. This incidence also took place before filing of first chargesheet but no action has been taken till date. On the one hand, CBI is opposing bail of 2G scam accused on an apprehension of interference in investigation whereas in case of actual incidence of interference, no action is being taken. In terms of magnitude of the crime, that is loss to the exchequer, Loop has caused almost equivalent loss as Datacom and Unitech has done. CAG also said that Loop was ineligible for license on the ground of objects clause and paid up capital. In case of Swan and Unitech, CBI has filed the chargesheet pending reply of the Letter Rogatory but chargesheet against Loop is being delayed contending that reply on the Letter Rogatory is pending. For Loop, opinions from the Corporate Affairs ministry (MCA) and legal experts are being considered but no such opinion was not taken for Swan-Reliance connection. In a recent communication, MCA has reversed its stand of April 13, 2009 confirming violation of norms by Essar. Surprisingly, Loop is aware of such MCA communication but CBI is claiming its ignorance. Why CBI is receiving various representations from legal experts and politicians to save Ruias? Isnt it sufficient to show how influential is the power of Surname in India? DHOOT Dhoot company (Datacom Solutions) also got 21 GSM licenses in 2008 at 2001 price and therefore, has a fair contribution in the loss to exchequer claimed by CBI in its chargesheet. Despite having recorded statements of DoT officials (Kirthy Kumar, S K Saxena, S E Rizwi and S C Sharma) saying that Rajya Sabha MP Rajkumar Dhoot of Videocon group was present at DoT reception where applicants were completing formalities relating to LOI. In fact, Dhoot partner in Datacom, Mahendra Nahata, was creating "disturbance and chaos" on crucial day of January 2008. Datacom is the major beneficiary of tweaking in FCFS policy by coming at number 2 position from number 9 position. But, CBI is going cold on these issues and protecting Dhoot brothers. MITTAL Though it is called as 2G Spectrum Scam, but investigation agencies are keeping their ears, eyes and mouth closed where the spectrum is. According to CAG report, old operators, including Sunil Bharti Mittal company, are hoarding spectrum of 150 MHz. Even in JPC, CBI stated that Sunil Bharti Mittal-led Bharti Airtel was allotted spectrum beyond 8 MHz in violation of eligibility norms. Five months have gone in the preliminary inquiry registered in January 2011 on allocation of 2G spectrum during 2001-07, but CBI is still busy in scrutinizing the documents, looking at the telecom policy and its implementation by telecom ministers. Justice Shivraj V.

Patil Committee report is also being looked into by CBI (sent to it by the Telecom Ministry early this year) which has reported many faults in the functioning of the previous telecom ministers and DoT officials favouring old operators. How much time does the CBI needs to read Justice Shivraj Patils Repot of 149 pages and to convert its PE into FIR. Shockingly, when CBI says that it is busy in looking at the telecom policy, then pending such review, how it can blame A. Raja for tweaking the same, or is the CBI is again trying to protect some big names like Mittals. Recently, it was reported that documents related to the telecom policy of 1994 are untraceable in DoT. Could it be that the CBI is waiting for crucial papers to go missing and then to get into action? Delay Tactics Adopted by Big Influencers As per recent media report on CBI performance, at least 2300 cases are pending unsolved for more than a decade. The agency has at least 1000 cases pending for more than 15 years and 381 cases for more than two decades. As per K Madhavan, former joint director of CBI, "The pile-up happens due to various tactics used by influential accused. They want to delay the case. This is a main reason why 99% of the cases move slowly in CBI courts." The latest example supporting K Madhavan statement is 2G spectrum scam where persons like Balwa, Goenka and Chandra have been arrested. In case of Ambani, small employees have been arrested. In case of Ruias, the CBI chargesheet itself has got delayed, since this time, Loop was supposed to figure in the chargesheet. Why no action has been taken against big Surnames despite having all the evidences? Can someone believe that these small people, who have been arrested till date, were influential enough to tweak the telecom policies in their favour and against the big people like Tatas, Birlas or Ambanis? This makes it very clear that it is easier to buy anything in India if you are carrying a big Surname.