The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that it could not reject the presidential reference on 2G spectrum judgment solely because it was purported to have been issued with “malafide” intent.
Chief Justice S K Kapadia, heading the Constitution Bench, which heard the petition, however, said “the reference overrides the judgment (on 2G).
Meanwhile, after hearing Prashant Bhushan-- counsel for the Centre for Public Interest Litigation(CPIL)-- Justice Dipak Misra, one of the judges on the Bench, told him that the last sentence of his summing up remarks about the existing method of allocation of natural resources being opaque, non-competitive, inefficient, arbitrary and full of corruption was totally unwarranted.
Earlier for the second successive day, senior counsel Soli Sorabjee also appearing for the CPIL insisted that the apex court should not entertain the reference.
However, the Bench asked Sorabjee whether it shouldn’t address the questions thrown up by the reference. Replying to the court, Sorabjee said, “Doubt arises only when different High Courts and Tribunals in the country give different interpretations. Then you are going into the merits,” Sorabjee said.
According to Bhushan, “as far as the government is concerned, it is clear that the government does not entertain any doubt whether the judgment is about the telecom and other resources. Their understanding of the judgment is crystal clear”.
Reacting to the counsel’s contention, the CJI said “The government says whether it extends to Mines & Minerals Act? How do we work it out? Can’t we answer that question?” Justice Kapadia asked.