India had 548.7 million active telecom subscribers in January

The active subscriber number also known as VLR showed, Bharti Airtel had the highest ratio of active subscribers compared to its total subscriber base at 92.63%. This was followed by Idea Cellular that reported a ratio of 90.34% between its total subscriber base and VLR subscribers

New Delhi: The number of mobile subscribers in India increased by 2.52% for the month of January 2011, taking the total number to 771.18 million, reports PTI.
However, the number of active mobile subscribers according to Visitor Location Register (VLR) data in the first month of January was only in the range of 548.66 million.
VLR numbers provide details on active customers at any given point of time, excluding switched-off and out-of- coverage area customers. In December 2010, total telecom subscribers base was 752.19 million, according to the data released by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).
The overall teledensity (telephones per 100 people) in India touched 806.13 million in the period under review as compared to 787.28 million in December last year.
The growth in the wireless category was led by Bharti Airtel, which added 3.3 million subscribers, taking its user base to 155.5 million. Reliance Communications added 3.2 million subscribers followed by Vodafone (3.1 million), BSNL (2.1 million), Idea Cellular (2.5 million), Tata Teleservices (1.8 million) and Uninor (1.79 million), the release said.
The active subscriber number also known as VLR showed, Bharti Airtel had the highest ratio of active subscribers compared to its total subscriber base at 92.63%. This was followed by Idea Cellular that reported a ratio of 90.34% between its total subscriber base and VLR subscribers. Etisalat had least ratio of VLR subscribers at 33.55%."We have taken VLR subscriber base available on last working day of January as per telecom operators record," explained a TRAI official.
The total active VLR number in the report excludes the CDMA VLR figure of BSNL, as the service provider has not provided the VLR figures corresponding to their total CDMA subscriber base of 5.38 million.The proportion of VLR subscribers is about 71.14% of the total wireless subscriber base reported by the service providers.
The overall wireline subscriber base, declined from 35.09 million in January 2011 to 34.94 million in December 2010. BSNL and MTNL collectively held 82.82% share of the wireline market.The total broadband subscriber base increased 2.70% from 10.92 million in December to 11.21 million in January 2011.


Petition against All-India Bar exam on Sunday, as legitimacy issue remains unresolved

Law students and advocates have challenged the Bar Council order that makes the examination compulsory. But while the court has not decided on the issue yet, the exam, which was postponed twice, is to be held on 6th March

A decision on the legitimacy of the All-India Bar Examination (AIBE) is pending in the Supreme Court. However, without any further announcements from the court or the Bar Council of India, the exam is set to be held on 6th March, as scheduled. But according to activists, if the exams are held without the matter being resolved, there could be legal complications.

"If the exams are allowed to be held as scheduled, and later the court decides that the exam itself is invalid, all the students and advocates will suffer. There will be legal complications, which may harm their careers and hamper proceedings in court," said RTI activist Babubhai Vaghela, who has petitioned the court to cancel the exam.

The confusion was set off when the Bar Council of India (BCI) decided to hold an all India exam in 2010. The Bar Council declared that it was compulsory for law graduates to pass the exam in order to become advocates and appear before the court. This condition, however, violated the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961, which does not make any such exam mandatory. According to the Act, any law student who has acquired his degree, can register as an advocate with the local bar council and start his practice.

But the Bar Council, through a resolution, declared an amendment to the Act and declared the exam compulsory, which anyway is strictly the power of Parliament to do so.

Many writ petitions were filed before several high courts, challenging the BCI's authority to hold such an exam. Both activists and law students opposed the exam, saying it was arbitrary and violated Article 14 of the Constitution that gives citizens the right to equality. Many regional bar councils also opposed the exam, questioning the rationale of adding one more exam in the already long list of exams that law students have to take to earn their degrees.

"This exam is not going to improve the quality of legal education," Mr Vaghela said. "It will be an additional harassment and will prove disadvantageous to students who come from rural or impoverished background."

Following this controversy, the exam was postponed twice, first to December 2010, and then again to March 2011. Taking note of the situation, the Supreme Court allowed the BCI to transfer the petition to the Delhi High Court and club all six writ petitions.

However, even as the matter was sub judice, the BCI declared that it would despatch roll numbers to the students appearing for the exam. While the petitioners have urged the Supreme Court and the government to take a decision on the matter before the scheduled date of the exams, there has been no conclusion yet. Confusion prevails and criticism has been mounting against the BCI and the AIBE.

Judicial activist Sandeep Jalan said, "In the absence of any notices, if the exams are allowed to be held it will give the impression that it is valid and that the BCI is authorised to hold such an exam. It will be better if the exams are postponed until a decision is reached."




4 years ago

Yes, I appreciate the efforts to all petitioners including mr. Vaghela for opposing the AIBE, large nos of fresh advocate are not interested to appear in aibe, because they are deprived from practice without passing the Exam, why BCI think about a middle class advocates who received their Law Degree after hard working with this hope after getting degree they will start earning to full-fill their families daily need, but BCI decision to conduct the exam, broke their dream, its is humble request to BCI please reconsider decision and think about advocates those can not work anywhere after enrollment with bar council.


5 years ago

Book: Sure Success AIBE & JCJ authored by DVRao and fore worded by Justice Subhasan Reddy, Chief Justice (Retd), High courts of T.N & Kerala & Former Chair Person, APSHRC; Sri A.Narasimha Reddy, Chairman, Bar Council of A.P is released. For details visit:

adv prashant arunrao palve

6 years ago


RBI to soon complete probe into Rs460 crore Citibank fraud

Several depositors and HNIs were duped in the Rs460.91 crore fraud, which was engineered by a Citibank's global wealth manager Shivraj Puri who was working at Gurgaon branch of the bank

New Delhi: The government today said that Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has conducted a special inquiry into Rs460 crore Citibank fraud case and was in the process of completing its final report, reports PTI.

"The RBI has conducted a special scrutiny of the related accounts at Citibank, Gurgaon (branch) and other connected accounts at other banks. The final report is being completed," minister of state for finance Namo Narain Meena told the Lok Sabha in a written reply.

Several depositors and high networth individuals (HNIs) were duped in the Rs460.91 crore fraud, which was engineered by a Citibank's global wealth manager Shivraj Puri who was working at Gurgaon branch of the bank.

The US-based Citibank is headed by Indian-born Vikram Pandit, who is currently on a visit to India. The government had in 2008 honoured Mr Pandit with the Padma Bhushan.

Pointing out that the fraud in the Citibank's Gurgaon branch was going on since September 2009, the minister said, "The major transactions took place between May 2010 and November 2010. The bank has furnished details of the fraud to the RBI in the Fraud Monitoring Report."

Citibank's manager Mr Puri, Mr Meena said, "Perpetrated the fraud by mobilising funds to the tune of Rs460.91 crore unauthorisedly from HNI customers and certain corporate for the purpose of investing in stock market, assuring them high returns."

While providing details of the modus operandi, the minister said, Mr Puri fabricated a circular of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to lure people into investing into accounts held by his accomplices Premnath, Shiela Premnath and Deeksha Puri.

The investors, Mr Meena added, were even issued fake receipts/acknowledgements on Citibank's stationary.

The funds thus collected through the "Premnath Account" were transferred to various brokerage houses for making investment in the securities market.

"There were 27 other accounts which had been opened in the (Citibank's Gurgaon branch) in the names of Mr Puri's relatives..," the minister added.

Besides, he said, the fraudulent transactions also took place in the accounts of broker firms like BG Financial Services, G 2S Management consultants and Normans Martin Broker.

The fraud came to light after the bank look into a query from a customer at Citibank's Nehru Place branch about its scheme offering high returns.

After discovering the fraud, the Citibank on 5th December 2010, filed a complaint with the Gurgaon police which is investigating the case.


We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.

To continue

Sign Up or Sign In


To continue

Sign Up or Sign In



The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)