Editing Telecommunications in India (section)

===Licence cancellation===
{{Main|2G spectrum case}}

On 2 February 2012 the Supreme Court ruled on petitions filed by [[Subramanian Swamy]] and the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) represented by [[Prashant Bhushan]], challenging the 2008 allotment of 2G licenses,<ref name=license /> cancelling all 122 spectrum licences granted during [[A. Raja]] ([[Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (India)|Minister of Communications & IT from 2007 to 2009]]), the primary official accused's term as communications minister.<ref name=license>{{cite news|title=Supreme Court quashes 122 2G licences awarded in 2008|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_supreme-court-quashes-122-2g-licences-awarded-in-2008_1645296|newspaper=DNA|access-date=3 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120614033029/http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_supreme-court-quashes-122-2g-licences-awarded-in-2008_1645296|archive-date=14 June 2012|url-status=live|df=dmy-all}}</ref> and described the allocation of 2G spectrum as "unconstitutional and arbitrary".<ref>{{cite news|title=Five crore fine for Unitech, Swan and Tata Teleservices|url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/five-crore-fine-for-unitech-swan-and-tata-teleservices-172607|newspaper=NDTV|access-date=3 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131225162134/http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/five-crore-fine-for-unitech-swan-and-tata-teleservices-172607|archive-date=25 December 2013|url-status=live|df=dmy-all}}</ref> The bench of [[GS Singhvi]] and [[Asok Kumar Ganguly]] imposed a fine of {{INRConvert|50|m|nolink=yes}} on Unitech Wireless, Swan Telecom and Tata Teleservices and a {{INRConvert|5|m|nolink=yes}} fine on [[Loop Telecom]], [[S Tel]], Allianz Infratech and [[MTS India|Sistema Shyam Tele Services]].<ref name="SC quashes 122 licences">{{cite news|title=SC quashes 122 licences|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/2G-scam-SC-scraps-122-licences-granted-under-Rajas-tenure-trial-court-to-decide-on-Chidambarams-role/articleshow/11725097.cms|date=2 February 2012|access-date=3 July 2018|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120715072719/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-02-02/india/31016262_1_spectrum-licences-2g-spectrum-allotment-case|archive-date=15 July 2012|url-status=live|newspaper=[[The Times of India]]|df=dmy-all}}</ref> According to the ruling the then granted licences would remain in place for four months, after which time the government would reissue the licences.<ref>{{cite news|title=Licences to remain in place for 4 months|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/2G-scam-SC-quashes-122-licences-trial-court-to-decide-on-Chidambarams-role-CBI-to-submit-probe-report-to-CVC/articleshow/11724453.cms|newspaper=Times of India|access-date=3 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160506040824/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/2G-scam-SC-quashes-122-licences-trial-court-to-decide-on-Chidambarams-role-CBI-to-submit-probe-report-to-CVC/articleshow/11724453.cms|archive-date=6 May 2016|url-status=live|df=dmy-all}}</ref>