Dipak Misra,J. - (1.) The three transferred cases, namely, Transfer Case (Civil) No. 43 of 2015, Transfer Case (Civil) No. 64 of 2015 and Transfer Case (Civil) No. 65 of 2015, had their origin in the High Courts of Delhi, Tripura and Karnataka respectively. The High Courts were moved under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the terms and conditions of Notice Inviting Application-2015 (for short, 'NIA') for allocation of spectrums in various areas. The High Court of Tripura in W.P.(C) No. 52 of 2015 and W.P.(C) No. 53 of 2015 was prayed for grant of interim relief which included extension of permission to the participants in the NIA to be bidded for minimum 4.4 MHz, IN 900 MHz band in the North East service area. The High Court, while dealing with interim prayer, 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 licences 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."
(2.) The said orders were assailed by the Union of India in S.L.P. (Civil) Nos. 5735-5736 of 2015. This Court issued notice and eventually on 26.2.2015 directed stay of the order passed by the High Court of Tripura at Agartala and permitted the auction to continue on the date fixed, but the same should not be finalized without the leave of the Court. The Court further directed that the said condition shall be put forth on the website so that all the bidders are aware of the order of this Court and no bidder shall claim equity because of his participation or success in the tendering process.
(3.) It needs to be stated here that by this time, certain transfer petitions were allowed. Transfer cases were taken up on 26.3.2015 wherein this Court passed the following order:- "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 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 finalization is subject to the final result of the special leave petition, as well as the transferred cases.";