“It has been observed that per second billing system is more acceptable among majority of the subscribers, because it ensures that subscribers pay only for the actual usage,” said TRAI
The Telecom Regulator Authority of India (TRAI) has made it mandatory for all telecom service providers to offer at least one, per paisa per secondtariff plan. The sector regulator has also allowed telecom operators to have up to 25 different tariff plans, in total. Consumer organisations have lauded the move stating that it will brings more clarity in tariff plans. But they pointed that such plans need to be popularised as they are deliberately kept away from the users.
Click Here for more
Consumer Resources 
Pros & Cons of ‘One second Billing” ‘Pay per use’ are mere sales Jargon to confuse users.
Please see blog http://wp.me/p1ZsI2-6S
Per second billing is nothing new. It was adopted in GSM networks in Mumbai in 1996 initially by BPL and then MAX and withdrawn later due to obvious reasons. Basically, these are only some technology jargon to create media hype by Operators to confuse the customers.
The crux of the matter is the tariff and charge per unit time is important and not the duration at which charging is done. As explained earlier, there is no considerable advantage with ‘One Second Charging’ neither for the Users nor the Service providers. Deviating from universally accepted standard metering plans will only add confusion in the entire business. It will also open out scope for unhealthy alternatives to charge the user for various usage of the phone for which charges are not levied now under the guise of ‘pay per use’.
In every business, there are certain straightforward, genuinely rightful rules of moneymaking. Ignoring these will be suicidal. The best option for the operators is to adopt standard charging plans with legitimate form of charging and concentrate on good quality service to win over the competition than using mere propaganda gimmicks such as ‘Per second billing’, ‘Pay per use’ etc.
Hope better sense will prevail with TRAI in not pushing such non-standard charging ideas etc., that neither will benefit Users nor the Industry in the long run and likely to open yet another Pandora’s box.
When ALL disputes between cellular provider and subscriber is to be referred to arbitration, why do cellular companies file a complaint or suit to recover billing dues? Shouldn’t cellular companies too go for arbitration? Subscribers should take this defence before paying any bills..