BSNL’s Indigenous 4G Rollout with TCS: Atmanirbhar Bharat’s Champion or Government’s Burden?

 

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), India’s state-owned telecom giant, has long been a symbol of public-sector resilience in a market dominated by private players like Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel. As of March 28, 2025, BSNL is in the thick of rolling out its much-delayed 4G network, leveraging indigenous technology developed in collaboration with Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) and the Centre for Development of Telematics (C-DOT). This effort aligns with the government’s Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India) initiative, aiming to reduce foreign dependency and foster homegrown innovation. But as BSNL struggles to regain its footing, questions arise: Is the government unfairly burdening BSNL with the full onus of self-reliance? Why is BSNL restricted from imports while Jio thrives with global tech? And with customer complaints mounting over its 4G trial phase, who bears the blame employees or the government?

BSNL’s 4G Ambition with TCS

BSNL’s 4G rollout is a cornerstone of India’s telecom self-reliance narrative. Partnering with TCS, Tejas Networks, and C-DOT, BSNL aims to deploy 100,000 4G towers nationwide by mid-2025, a project valued at over Rs 24,500 crore. As of early 2025, over 65,000 sites are live, with trials completed across all telecom circles. The technology touted as fully indigenous includes a 4G core and radio access network (RAN) designed to be upgradable to 5G, positioning BSNL as a potential competitor in a 5G-dominated future. This is no small feat: India is now among a handful of nations with its own telecom stack, a testament to the TCS-led consortium’s engineering prowess.

Yet, the journey has been fraught with delays. While private operators rolled out 4G a decade ago, BSNL lagged, losing market share (down to 7-8% by 2024) and subscribers (88 million as of mid-2024) to Jio’s 40-42% dominance. The government’s Rs 3.22 lakh crore revival packages since 2019 have aimed to reverse this, with a focus on indigenous 4G as a strategic pivot. But the question lingers: Is this a genuine opportunity for BSNL or a mandated burden?

Government Partiality: BSNL as the Atmanirbhar Poster Child?

The Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative has placed BSNL in a unique position. Unlike Jio and Airtel, which have historically sourced equipment from global vendors like Nokia, Ericsson, and even Huawei (pre-ban), BSNL has been directed to rely solely on indigenous tech. Union Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia has emphasized this as a deliberate choice: “We will not use equipment from China or any other foreign country,” he said in 2024, underscoring national security and self-reliance. This contrasts sharply with Jio, which, despite its “Made in India” 5G claims, integrates global components and partnerships (e.g., with Qualcomm and Nokia).

Is the government partial toward BSNL by forcing it to shoulder the Atmanirbhar mantle? Not quite. The policy reflects a broader geopolitical strategy post-2020 India-China tensions, aiming to reduce reliance on Chinese vendors like Huawei and ZTE across all operators. However, private players were given leeway to transition gradually, while BSNL faced immediate restrictions. Jio, for instance, imported equipment freely during its 4G and 5G rollouts, building a robust network before pivoting to partial indigenization. BSNL, meanwhile, was stuck with cancelled tenders (e.g., a 2020 Huawei-ZTE deal) and a mandate to wait for untested local tech, delaying its 4G launch by years.

This disparity isn’t favoritism toward BSNL but rather a strategic burden. The government sees BSNL as a public-sector vehicle to prove India’s technological mettle, while private firms face fewer constraints. Critics argue this handicaps BSNL in a hypercompetitive market where speed and scale matter more than ideology.

Import Restrictions: Why Not Level the Playing Field?

Why can’t BSNL import equipment like Jio did? The answer lies in policy and politics. Post-Galwan clash in 2020, the government amended procurement rules to bar companies from nations sharing land borders (read: China) from public contracts. BSNL, as a state entity, was bound by this, while private operators faced no such mandate until later security audits. Even then, Jio and Airtel could tap non-Chinese vendors (Nokia, Samsung) to bridge gaps, a luxury BSNL was denied in favor of an all-Indian solution.

This restriction has a flip side. Importing gear could have accelerated BSNL’s 4G rollout, but it would undermine the Atmanirbhar narrative and expose BSNL to the same supply chain vulnerabilities the policy seeks to avoid. TCS’s indigenous stack, while slower to deploy, offers long-term security and economic benefits jobs, innovation, and a domestic telecom ecosystem. Yet, in the short term, it leaves BSNL playing catch-up, fueling customer frustration.

Customer Complaints: The Trial Phase Woes

BSNL’s 4G service, still in trial as of March 2025, has drawn flak from users. Complaints range from spotty coverage to inconsistent speeds (despite peak trials hitting 40-45 Mbps). Moreover, rural subscribers switching to Jio or Airtel due to BSNL’s delays, with some calling it “a decade too late.” The trial phase covering Punjab, Haryana, and other northern states has onboarded 8 lakh users, but full commercial rollout awaits 20,000 active base stations.

These issues stem from the indigenous tech’s teething problems and BSNL’s limited spectrum (5-10 MHz in key bands vs. Jio’s 20+ MHz). The TCS-C-DOT core has stabilized faster than expected (10 months vs. 12), but scaling hardware deployment across India’s diverse terrain is a logistical nightmare. Customers, accustomed to Jio’s seamless 4G/5G, aren’t wrong to grumble but the trial phase is a necessary step for untested tech.

Who’s the Culprit: Employees or Government?

So, who’s to blame for BSNL’s 4G struggles? Employees point to the government, arguing that years of underfunding, delayed spectrum allocation (e.g., surrendering 850/900 MHz bands in 2021), and import bans crippled their ability to compete. Unions like the All Unions and Associations of BSNL (AUAB) warned in 2020 that without 4G, BSNL wouldn’t survive two years a prophecy nearly fulfilled until recent revival efforts.

Conversely, the government faults BSNL’s internal inefficiencies bloated workforce, slow decision-making, and resistance to modernization. The truth lies in between. Employees aren’t the culprits; they’re executing a mandated vision with limited resources. The government, however, bears responsibility for inconsistent policies: favoring private players with spectrum and flexibility while tying BSNL’s hands with ideological goals. External factors global supply chain dynamics and India’s late start in telecom R&D compound the issue.

Conclusion: A Balancing Act

BSNL’s 4G push with TCS indigenous technology is a bold bet on self-reliance, but it’s not without costs. The government isn’t partial toward BSNL in a protective sense it’s using it as a guinea pig for Atmanirbhar Bharat, a role Jio was never asked to play. Import restrictions reflect national priorities, not favoritism, yet they’ve left BSNL vulnerable. Customer complaints highlight real gaps, but the trial phase is a stepping stone, not a failure. Neither employees nor the government are sole culprits; the real challenge is reconciling a noble vision with market realities. As BSNL nears its 100,000-tower target, its success will test whether self-reliance can coexist with competitiveness or if it’s a burden too heavy to bear.