Allot or auction satellite telecom spectrum? Signal clarity, please.

livemint.com:

The 2G spectrum judgement of 2012 is making headlines again. The government is pleading at the Supreme Court (SC) for an amendment to its landmark telecom auctions ruling that mandated the sale of 2G spectrum to the highest bidder. But the Centre wants to allocate some spectrum through administrative means, such as licensing—an approach often used for procuring services from the private sector.

This comes amid talk of the telecom department processing a permit for Elon Musk’s Starlink that needs spectrum to run satellite communication services in India, which will improve connectivity in remote regions with poor land-based telecom infrastructure. But such exceptions are a sensitive matter, given the past political and economic fallout of the 2G case. In response to a presidential reference, by which the country’s nominal head seeks clarity on any law pertaining to current or anticipated public importance, the SC had clarified that spectrum auctions were not universally required.

The 2012 judgement had the severe economic consequence of 122 telecom licences getting cancelled, causing chaos. The SC’s reply to the President was advisory in nature, but the government is not taking any chances. India’s new Telecom Act allows allocation of spectrum via administrative means in certain cases, but leaves it subject to ambiguous determinations of public interest, which is not defined.

Economic welfare considerations go beyond revenue maximization, but until this is spelt out in laws, administrative decisions would be vulnerable to judicial intervention. The pricing of public goods or services must help ensure a fair distribution of resources to those able to make the best use of them. If the primary focus of allocating public