|
The Supreme Court on Friday decided to begin hearing from July 10on Presidential Reference moved by the government for its opinionon issues arising out of its 2G spectrum judgement includingwhether auctioning of natural resources across all sectors ismandatory. A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadiaissued notices to the state governments and industrial chambersFICCI and CII and sought their responses on behalf of the privateindustries. The Reference has also asked the court for its view whether theverdict in the 2G case be given retrospective effect for radiowaves granted since 1994. The court also issued notices to the NGO, Centre for PublicInterest Litigation (CPIL) and Janata Party President SubramanianSwamy on whose petitions a bench comprising justices G S Singhviand A K Ganguly (since retired) had delivered a judgement onFebruary 2 cancelling 122 telecom licences by holding that thefirst-come-first-served policy was illegal and unconstitutional. The bench headed by Justice Singhvi had held that all naturalresources should be allocated through auction. The Constitution Bench also comprising justices D K Jain, J SKhehar, Dipak Misra and Ranjan Gogoi said that the notices shall beserved within a period of two weeks to the parties including byemail, fax, courier or by the messenger of the Union of India. The bench also said the notices on the reference will be served onall states through their standing counsel. It made it clear that for expeditious hearing of the matter,statements of fact and arguments shall be filed by the parties inthe court within three weeks. Govt's eight questions The government had on April 12 moved the Reference signed byPresident Pratibha Patil in which eight questions have been raised,including whether there could be judicial interference in policymatters, vis-a-vis disposal of natural resources and investmentsmade by foreign investors under multi and bilateral agreements. "Whether the judgement lays down that the permissible methodfor disposal of all natural resources across all sectors and in allcircumstances is by the conduct of auction," the Referencehas stated. "Whether the court holds that within the permissible scope ofjudicial review that the policy is flawed, is the court not obligedto take into account investment made under the said policyincluding the investment made by foreign investors under the multiand bilateral agreements," it said. It sought the court's opinion on "whether the judgementis required to be given retrospective effect so as to unsettle thelicences issued for 2G spectrum and allocated after 1994 till2008." The Reference also touched upon the 3G spectrum allocated through"auction" and wanted to know the implications of thejudgement on it. "Whether 3G spectrum acquired through the auction in 2010 byentities whose (2G) licences have been quashed in the judgementstands withdrawn," it asked. A meeting of the Union Cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister ManmohanSingh, had on April 10 cleared the Telecom Ministry'sproposal to seek the Supreme Court's opinion on variousissues arising out of the February 2 judgement. The two-judge bench, in its verdict, had also observed that auctionwas best suited route for allocating natural resources like telecomspectrum because the policy of first-come-first-served was flawed. In the Reference, the government had sought the court'sopinion on the question "whether in view of the judgement thetelecom licences that were granted other than pursuant to anauction (1994 licences) may be said to be granted illegally and thetelecom licences granted on the principle of first-come-first-served (the 2001 basic licences and licences between2003 and 2007) may be said to have been granted illegally". The next question on which it sought the court's opinion was"what further steps are required to be taken by thegovernment to deal with such licences that may be said to have beengranted illegally". It has further asked if the licences were held to be illegal, isthe government required to withdraw the spectrum allocated to theexisting licencees or charge them with retrospective effect and atwhat price and from what date. The government has sought opinion on "whether in view of thejudgement, the 2008 dual technology licence may be said to beillegal." It has also sought the court's view that if the dualtechnology licences are to be considered illegal, what steps are tobe taken by the government. Another question on which the court's view has been sought iswhether auction is the only legitimate mode of allocation of bandswhere there may not be competition like in CDMA and where TRAI maderecommendation in WLL. The e-commerce company in China offers quality products such as China Security Seal Bags , Mailing Bubble Envelopes, and more. For more , please visit Mailing Bubble Envelopes today!
Related Articles -
China Security Seal Bags, Mailing Bubble Envelopes,
|
