Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Union Of India vs Bharti Hexacom Ltd. Etc Etc on 7 May, 2015
Bench: Dipak Misra, Prafulla C. Pant
SLP(C) 5735-5736/15
1
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.5 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.5735-5736/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12/02/2015
in CM No. 54/2015,12/02/2015 in WP No.52/2015, 12/02/2015 in WP
No. 53/2015 passed by the High Court Of Tripura at Agarthala)
UNION OF INDIA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
BHARTI HEXACOM LTD. ETC ETC Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for impleadment and raising additional grounds)
WITH T.C.(C) No.43/2015
With T.C.(C) No.64/2015
T.C.(C) No.65/2015
Date: 07/05/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S.G.
Mr. P.S. Narasimha, ASG
Mr. Ritin Rai, Adv.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. K. Parameshwar, Adv.
Mr. Dhruv Tamta, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Mr. D. S. Mahra, AOR
Signature Not Verified
Ms. Shally Bhasin, Adv.
Digitally signed by
Chetan Kumar
Date: 2015.05.09
12:43:27 IST
Reason: Mr. Sadapurna Mukherjee, adv.
Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. Chaitanya S., Adv.
SLP(C) 5735-5736/15
2
Mr. Sunit Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. Sushant Shekhar, Adv.
Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR
For Respondent(s) Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Harsh Kaushik, Adv.
Mr. Abhay Chattopadhyay, Adv.
Ms. Chinmayee Chandra, Adv.
Ms. Stephanie V. Sonawane, Adv.
Mr. Safeer L. Hussain, Adv.
Mr. Nidhiram Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Sharma, AOR
Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR
Mr. Tarun Gulati, Adv.
Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, Adv.
Mr. Manjul Bajpai, Adv.
Mr. Shashi Mathews, Adv.
Mr. Kishore Kunal, AOR
Mr. Shashwat Bajpai, Adv.
Mr. Mansoor Ali Shaket, Adv.
Ms. Vibha Dhawan, Adv.
Mr. Nitin Kala, Adv.
Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR
Mr. Harish N. Salve, Sr. Adv.
Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR
Mr. Mohit Paul, Adv.
Mr. Amit Bansal, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
S.L.P.(C) Nos.5735-5736 of 2015 Hearing resumed.
By these special leave petitions, the Union of India has challenged the interim order passed by the High Court of Tripura at Agartala on 12th February, 2015, in C.M. No.54 of 2015 in W.P.(C) No.52 of 2015 and W.P.(C) No.53 of 2015. The SLP(C) 5735-5736/15 3 High Court while dealing with the interim prayer, has directed as follows:
“Therefore, at this stage, we feel that only the following order should be passed:
Both the petitioners are permitted to submit
2 applications instead of one. One application may be for 4.4. MHz and the other application will be for a minimum of 5 MHz and may extend up to 8.8, if the petitioners so desire. We have been informed at the Bar that two applications may not be possible to be submitted because it is online. We are not sure whether the same because it may not be possible. Therefore, we direct that it is for the petitioners to decide what application they will submit online but they may also simultaneously submit one application offline in hard copy with the Secretary, Department of Telecommunication, Union of India on or before 16th February, 2015.
The Union of India may proceed with the assessment of the applications but no final decision in the matter shall be taken without permission of this Court. Furthermore, any preliminary decision taken shall also be subject to the result of the present writ petition. Admittedly, the licenses of the petitioners are expiring only in December, 2015, and, therefore, we would like to ensure that the writ petition is disposed of much earlier.” This matter was listed on 17th February, 2015 and the Court directed issuance of notice. Thereafter, on various dates some orders were passed and, eventually, on 26th February, 2015, this Court directed as follows:
“The impugned order dated 12.02.2015 passed in CM No.54 of 2015 in WP(C) No.52 and 53 of 2015 by the High Court of Tripura at Agartala shall remain stayed.
The auction as scheduled to be SLP(C) 5735-5736/15 4 commenced from 04.03.2015 but the same shall not be finalized without the leave of this Court. It is hereby made clear that the said condition shall be put forth on the website so that all the bidders are aware of the order of this Court. In addition, no bidder shall claim equity because of his participation or success in the tendering process.” On the same date, the Transfer Petition (Civil) Nos.352-356 of 2015 and 363 of 2015, were allowed. Thereafter, on 26th March, 2015, the following order came to be passed:
“Heard Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Attorney General and Mr. P.S. Narasimha, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India and Mr. P. Chidambaram and Mr. Gopal Jain, learned senior counsel, along with Ms. Shelly Bhasin, learned counsel for the respondents.
Be it stated, on the earlier occasion, this Court while entertaining Transfer Petition (C) Nos.352-356 of 2015 and 363 of 2015, had allowed the said transfer petitions. As we find, the records of the transfer petitions have not been received, but copies of the writ petitions have been filed and the pleadings are complete in all respects. If in any matter pleadings are not complete, it should be done within a week hence.
It is open to the Union of India to file a further affidavit within a period of one week from today. It is hereby made clear that no adjournment should be sought on that score.
Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Attorney General appearing for the Union of India, has submitted that there has been auction commencing 4th March, 2015 and ending SLP(C) 5735-5736/15 5 25th March, 2015, in respect of the bands, namely, 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 MHz and 2100 MHz in respect of all the States and there has been a fierce and competitive auction and the entire revenue likely to be generated is Rs.1.09 lac crores. Learned Attorney General would further submit that if the order of stay is not modified, the Union of India will be facing grave fiscal difficulty as there is ample possibility of collecting at least Rs.28,000 crores by 31st March, 2015. It is urged by him that the auction itself would show that the “Notice Inviting Tender” has been a workable one and, therefore, sustainable in law. In this backdrop, submits, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, that the interim order passed on the earlier occasion should be modified granting leave to the Union of India to finalize the auction, subject to the final decision of the special leave petition and the transferred cases.
Mr. P. Chidambaram and Mr. Gopal Jain, learned senior counsel appearing for the contesting respondents, per contra, would contend that the competitive bidding was not really competitive, but a compulsive bidding as parties were obliged to bid because of their survival. In addition, it is put forth by them that the amount that has to be thought of being collected by the Union of India, is factually incorrect, inasmuch as the bidders who are successful have to deposit the amount within ten days from the completion of date of auction, that is, 25th March, 2015. Learned senior counsel would further submit that the entire design of the “Notice Inviting Tender” is gloriously faulty and solely because the auction has taken place and money is likely to be collected, would not be a justification for the modification of the interim order.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to modify the order to the extent that the Union of India would be at liberty to finalize the auction and proceed thereafter, but all the successful bidders shall be intimated that the said SLP(C) 5735-5736/15 6 finalization is subject to the final result of the special leave petition, as well as the transferred cases. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Attorney General also undertakes that the competent authority of the Union of India would intimate the successful bidders to get themselves impleaded as parties and, needless to say, they are under obligation to implead themselves as they are to be heard in the matter.
The said impleaded parties shall also file their respective affidavits stating their stand and stance in the said affidavits.
Let the matter be listed on 16th April, 2015. It shall be taken up as the first item on the Board.
Transfer Petition No.477 of 2015 The transfer petition is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Let the transferred case be listed along with the S.L.P.(C) Nos.5735-5736 of 2015, on 16th April, 2015.” At this juncture, it is apt to note that the writ petitions filed before the High Court of Tripura, forming the subject matter of W.P.(C) No.52 of 2015 and W.P.(C) No.53 of 2015, were transferred to this Court and they were numbered as Transferred Case (Civil) Nos.63 and 64 of 2015. The Transferred Case (Civil) No.63 of 2015 has already been withdrawn. The Transferred Case No.64 of 2015 is surviving in praesenti.
It is conceded at the Bar that as the writ petition has been addressed on its own merits and the auction has taken place, subject to final result of the special leave SLP(C) 5735-5736/15 7 petitions and the transferred cases, there is no justification to keep the special leave petitions pending. In our considered opinion, the submission raised by the learned counsel for the parties is justified and, therefore, we are inclined to think that nothing really remains to be adjudicated in the special leave petitions as the whole controversy is being addressed to in the transferred cases.
The successful bidders, who have been impleaded in the special leave petitions by virtue of the order passed by this Court on 26th March, 2015, shall be deemed to have been impleaded in the pending transferred cases and are permitted to argue the matter. Be it noted, the successful bidders who have sought impleadment before this Court, shall be impleaded as respondents in all the transferred cases. Registry is directed to rectify the cause title accordingly.
The special leave petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
T.C.(C) Nos.43/2015, 64/2015 and 65/2015 Put up for further hearing on 13th May, 2015. Needless to say, the matters will be taken up as the first matter on the Board.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master