Delhi High Court Upholds DMRC Decision To Award Telecom Work To Indus Towers - 2025-09-04

Delhi High Court Upholds DMRC Decision To Award Telecom Work To Indus Towers

The High Court of Delhi has dismissed a petition filed by Crest Digitel Private Limited challenging the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited’s (DMRC) decision to award a contract for In-Building Solutions (IBS) to Indus Towers Limited on a nomination basis. Justice Sachin Datta, presiding over the matter, emphasized the paramount importance of upgrading critical infrastructure for public safety and connectivity.

The Dispute Over Connectivity

Crest Digitel, the petitioner, had previously entered into a License Agreement with the DMRC in 2019 for provisioning mobile coverage in underground metro stations. The petitioner alleged that the DMRC’s decision to award similar IBS work to Indus Towers without a competitive bidding process was arbitrary, discriminatory, and detrimental to its business model. Crest Digitel argued that its license fee was significantly higher than the rate negotiated with Indus Towers, creating an unfair competitive landscape.

DMRC’s Stance on Infrastructure Upgrades

The DMRC maintained that the petitioner had consistently failed to meet service obligations, including maintaining signal quality and, more recently, failing to roll out 5G services despite multiple notices. The respondent highlighted that the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) had flagged connectivity issues, necessitating urgent intervention. The DMRC asserted that the engagement of Indus Towers was a "natural continuation" of their existing arrangement, consistent with the GENERAL FINANCIAL RULES , 2017.

Judicial Analysis and Statutory Barriers

The High Court noted that the petitioner’s agreement was non-exclusive and did not preclude the DMRC from engaging other vendors to fulfill essential operational needs. Crucially, the Court invoked the Specific Relief Act, 1963 , noting that Section 20A creates a statutory bar against granting injunctions that would impede the progress of infrastructure projects.

Justice Sachin Datta observed: > "There can also be no cavil with the proposition that ensuring uninterrupted and seamless mobile connectivity, especially in the underground tunnel section of the Airport Metro Express Line, is a necessary imperative. Such connectivity plays an essential role in enabling emergency communication, passenger safety and operational coordination at all times."

The Court further remarked: > "This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that, despite the passage of more than three years since the launch of 5G services, the petitioner has neither installed nor rolled out 5G services."

Regarding the financial dispute, the Court noted: > "It would be inappropriate to issue directions which would impede or inhibit the Respondent No. 1 from taking requisite steps for upgradation of such crucial infrastructure."

Final Ruling and Implications

The Court disposed of the petition while recording an assurance from the DMRC that the license fee charged to Indus Towers would be brought on par with the rate paid by the petitioner, effectively addressing the primary grievance regarding financial discrimination. By refusing to interfere with the contract, the Court has reinforced the principle that public infrastructure requirements—such as seamless 5G connectivity—take precedence over private commercial disputes, leaving the petitioner to seek damages through civil proceedings if they feel their contractual rights were breached.