REPORTABLEIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTIONWRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 423 OF 2010Centre for Public Interest Litigation and others…PetitionersversusUnion of India and others…RespondentsWithWRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 10 OF 2011Dr. Subramanian Swamy…Petitioner versusUnion of India and others…Respondents
J U D G M E N TG.S. Singhvi, J.
1.The important questions which arise for consideration in these petitions,one of which has been filed by Centre for Public Interest Litigation, a registeredSociety formed by Shri V.M. Tarkunde (former Judge of this Court) for taking
up causes of public interest and conducting public interest litigation in anorganised manner, Lok Satta, a registered Society dedicated to politicalgovernance, reforms and fight against corruption, Telecom Watchdog andCommon Cause, both Non-Governmental Organisations registered as Societiesfor taking up issues of public importance and national interest, Sarva Shri J.M.Lingdoh, T.S. Krishnamurthi and N. Gopalasamy, all former Chief ElectionCommissioners, P. Shanker, former Central Vigilance Commissioner, Julio F.Ribero, former member of the Indian Police Service, who served as Director General of Police, Gujarat, Punjab and C.R.P.F. and Commissioner of Police,Mumbai, P.R. Guha, an eminent Senior Journalist and visiting faculty member of various institutions including IIMs, IITs, FTII, IIFT, Delhi University,Jawaharlal Nehru University and Jamia Milia Islamia University and AdmiralR.H. Tahiliyani, former Chief of Naval Staff, former Governor and former Chairman of Transparency International India and the other has been filed byDr. Subramanian Swami, a political and social activist, are:(i) Whether the Government has the right to alienate, transfer or distribute natural resources/national assets otherwise than by following afair and transparent method consistent with the fundamentals of theequality clause enshrined in the Constitution?
2
(ii)Whether the recommendations made by the Telecom RegulatoryAuthority of India (TRAI) on 28.8.2007 for grant of Unified AccessService Licence (for short ‘UAS Licence’) with 2G spectrum in 800, 900and 1800 MHz at the price fixed in 2001, which were approved by theDepartment of Telecommunications (DoT), were contrary to the decisiontaken by the Council of Ministers on 31.10.2003?(iii)Whether the exercise undertaken by the DoT from September 2007to March 2008 for grant of UAS Licences to the private respondents interms of the recommendations made by TRAI is vitiated due toarbitrariness and malafides and is contrary to public interest?(iv)Whether the principle of first-come-first-served followed by theDoT for grant of licences is
ultra vires
the provisions of Article 14 of theConstitution and whether the said principle was arbitrarily changed bythe Minister of Communications and Information Technology(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Minister of C&IT’), without consultingTRAI, with a view to favour some of the applicants?(v)Whether the licences granted to ineligible applicants and thosewho failed to fulfil the terms and conditions of the licence are liable to bequashed?
3
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
