Take the pledge to vote

For a better tommorow#AajSawaroApnaKal
  • I agree to receive emails from News18

  • I promise to vote in this year's elections no matter what the odds are.
  • Please check above checkbox.


Thank you for
taking the pledge

Vote responsibly as each vote counts
and makes a diffrence


Issued in public interest by HDFC Life. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited (Formerly HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited) (“HDFC Life”). CIN: L65110MH2000PLC128245, IRDAI Reg. No. 101 . The name/letters "HDFC" in the name/logo of the company belongs to Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited ("HDFC Limited") and is used by HDFC Life under an agreement entered into with HDFC Limited. ARN EU/04/19/13618
LIVE TV DownloadNews18 App
News18 English
News18 » Politics
2-min read

2G: SC opinion confirms govt stand, says Sibal

Union minister Kapil Sibal said that the Supreme Court's opinion on 2G Presidential Reference confirmed the government's stand.


Updated:September 27, 2012, 4:17 PM IST
2G: SC opinion confirms govt stand, says Sibal
Union minister Kapil Sibal said that the Supreme Court's opinion on 2G Presidential Reference confirmed the government's stand.

New Delhi: Welcoming the Supreme Court (SC) opinion on the 2G Presidential Reference, Union Minister Kapil Sibal said that it had confirmed the government's stand.

"The Supreme Court has confirmed what the government had been saying, that policy making should be left exclusively to the government. The order has brought Constitutional clarity," said Sibal at a press meet.

"We welcome the judgement of the Supreme Court. It has made it clear that it is not for the court to lay down the method of allocation of natural resources. We are happy that the government can now take decisions without fearing the consequences from other Constitutional authorities," Sibal added.

In a major relief for the government, the Supreme Court on Thursday clarified that the auction order in the 2G scam was only restricted to telecom spectrum and not for all natural resources. The Supreme Court held the 2G Presidential Reference as maintainable.

A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice SH Kapadia has also clarified that its opinion has no bearing on the 2G order. Apart from Chief Justice Kapadia, the Constitution Bench also consisted of justices DK Jain, JS Khehar, Dipak Misra and Ranjan Gogoi. While upholding the Presidential Reference the court said that public good was above revenue maximisation.

The court has refused to answer all the eight questions raised in the Presidential Reference and answered only two questions.

The apex court bench also said that the policy of auction has not got a Constitutional mandate. The court said that it cannot prescribe a method of allocation of natural resources but can undertake judicial scrutiny on a case to case basis.

The Centre had moved the Presidential Reference on whether auctioning of natural resources is mandatory in line with its 2G spectrum judgement. The Centre had sought clarity on which resources needed to be auctioned and which ones could be allotted on a first-come-first-serve basis.

The court had on February 2, 2012, cancelled 122 2G licences and had said natural resources should be distributed through a public auction.

The government had on April 12 moved the Reference signed by the then President Pratibha Patil in which eight questions were raised, including whether there could be judicial interference in policy matters, vis-a-vis disposal of natural resources and investments made by foreign investors under multi and bilateral agreements.

"Whether the judgement lays down that the permissible method for disposal of all natural resources across all sectors and in all circumstances is by the conduct of auction," the Reference had stated.

"Whether the court holds that within the permissible scope of judicial review that the policy is flawed, is the court not obliged to take into account investment made under the said policy including the investment made by foreign investors under the multi and bilateral agreements," it said.

It sought the court's opinion on "whether the judgement is required to be given retrospective effect so as to unsettle the licences issued for 2G spectrum and allocated after 1994 till 2008."

The Reference also touched upon the 3G spectrum allocated through "auction" and wanted to know the implications of the judgement on it.

"Whether 3G spectrum acquired through the auction in 2010 by entities whose (2G) licences have been quashed in the judgement stands withdrawn," it asked.

Get the best of News18 delivered to your inbox - subscribe to News18 Daybreak. Follow News18.com on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and on YouTube, and stay in the know with what's happening in the world around you – in real time.

Read full article
Next Story
Next Story

Also Watch


Live TV

Countdown To Elections Results
To Assembly Elections 2018 Results