One of the major concerns of the Infrastructure builders in the Telecom industry has been the delays in the implementation of  projects caused by legal hurdles in laying inter city and intra city cables. Such problems have in the past affected Road and Rail projects resulting in time and cost  over-runs. Hence the industry was keenly observing what was in store for them in the Communication Convergence Bill (CCB).  

The industry must be reasonably satisfied with the provisions of the Bill regarding the provisions in this regard. The Bill has clear guidelines both in respect of public property as well as private property through which the “Right of Way” may be required by a facility progvider.

Under Chapter 13 of the CCB, if a licensee of a network infrastructure facility would like to lay cables or posts, through any property under the control of a  “Public Authority”, such an authority is bound to give permission “promptly”. Further, in case of an emergency requiring repair or alteration of cable etc, the facility provider may act even without obtaining such permission. The authority can of course  request for any alteration of the positioning of the Cable or Post of it considers necessary.

It has also been proposed  that each state would set up a “nodal Agency” to coordinate all works required to enable the facility provider get such permissions.

Disputes arising if any are to be referred to the District Court having jurisdiction over the property. 

In case of Private land, it would be necessary for the facility provider to obtain the consent of the owner of such property.  If  such consent is not fortcoming, the Communication Convergence Commission will have the authority to authorize the facility provider to take such steps as may be deemed fit. The Commission will also have the power under Section 62(1), to order any facility to be installed in any private land or require any property to be acquired with specified time limits, at compensation which it deems to be just.
 
Only if this option fails, the facility provider needs to approach the Government for acquisition as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act 1896. 

The above provisions along with Section 34 which provides for stiff penalty of upto Rs 5 crores and above for causing damage to the infrastructure facility, provide enough protection to the facility providers and goes a long way in preventing unnecessary delays to the projects. The provisions could  however  cause some harassment to private property owners in some cases. Perhaps this is a price to be paid by the community for the development.