A prosecution witness in the 2G spectrum allocation case on Thursday informed a Delhi court that according to the Unified Access Service Licences (UASL) guidelines, real estate firms were not prohibited from applying for the licences.
- Mohan, the Company Secretary of real estate firm Parsvnath Developers Ltd, which had applied for UAS licences in 22 circles in August 2007, stated to Special CBI Judge O. P. Saini that when the company applied for the 2G licences, they had thoroughly reviewed the UASL guidelines.
"When the company made an application for a UAS licence, I had gone through UASL guidelines. When I went through the guidelines and the company decided to file an application for UAS licences, it was quite clear to me that there was no restriction on a real estate company applying for a UAS licence," Mohan said.
Mohan testified that in August 2007, the firm attempted to venture into the telecom business and submitted applications to the Department of Telecom (DoT) for licences.
Mohan mentioned that their application was rejected by the DoT and Parsvnath Developers Ltd did not receive any licences.
During his cross-examination, he affirmed that their firm was compliant with the net worth criteria and paid-up equity capital criteria when it applied for the UASL on August 24, 2007.
He added that the firm was aware of August 2007 recommendations of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and knew that the entry fee for the grant of a pan-India UAS licence was Rs 1,658 crores.
"The company was in the know of TRAI recommendations of August 2007. The company knew that the entry fee for the grant of a pan-India UAS licence was Rs 1,658 crore, in view of TRAI recommendations. When the company made the application on August 24, 2007, it never knew that DoT was going to announce a cut-off date," Mohan said.
Mohan, whose deposition concluded today, stated that the main reason communicated to Parsvnath Developers Ltd by the DoT for rejecting its application for the UASL was that the telecom business was not included in the firm's object clause at the time of making the application.
He said the rejection of the application by the DoT was challenged by the firm before the Delhi High Court. Besides Mohan, the court also recorded the testimony of prosecution witness Raj Kumar Kapoor, a retired Director of Bycell Communications (P) Ltd, which had also applied for UAS licences in 2007.
Kapoor, whose recording of testimony concluded today, said he was called by the DoT officials for licences on January 10, 2008, but at Sanchar Bhawan, he was given a letter indicating that their application for UASL was not considered.