While refusing to take cognisance of communications minister Kapil Sibal’s claim that there was no loss to the government in allocation of 2G spectrum during the tenure of his predecessor, Mr A. Raja, the Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to the Centre, Trai and 11 telecom companies on a petition for cancelling their 2G licences for allegedly failing to roll out services.

The notices were issued on a PIL claiming that the 2G spectrum licences awarded to the 11 companies were liable to be cancelled for their “failure” to meet “rollout obligations” as stipulated in the deal itself.
A bench comprising Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly gave the Centre, Trai and the 11 companies three weeks to submit their affidavits in response to the petition. The companies are Etisalat, Uninor, Loop Telecom, S Tel. Videocon, Allianz Infra Tech, Idea Cellular, Tata Teleservices, Sistema Shyam Teleservices, Dishnet Wireless and Vodafone-Essar.
The notices were issued on a PIL by the NGO Centre for PIL and seven prominent citizens, former Chief Election Commiss-ioners J.M. Lyngdoh, T.S. Krishnamurthy and N. Gopalaswami, former CVC P. Shankar, former DGP Julio F. Ribeiro, former Navy Chief and chairman of Transparency Internat-ional’s India chapter R.H. Tahiliani and senior journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta.
As the petitioners’ counsel, Mr Prashant Bhushan, referred to the recent statement of new telecom minister Kapil Sibal that there was no loss to the exchequer and that the CAG’s calculations of a `1.76 lakh core loss was wrong, the apex court refused to take note of it on the basis of media reports. “We can’t take cognisance of it,” the bench said during arguments, adding merely that the issue of whether a loss had occurred had become “debatable”. But, at the same time, it referred to the findings of the Delhi high court in its two orders terming the action of DoT as “prima facie” arbitrary, the apex court’s own order, and the findings of the CAG and the CVC recommending that the CBI register an FIR. The top court said all these pointed towards “something seriously wrong” in dealing with the whole issue.
“We have noted all these facts,” the judges said while referring to their December 16 order asking the CBI, Enforcement Directorate and the income-tax department’s investigation wing to expedite the probe into the 2G scam case.
As Mr Bhushan stated that all the authorities that had looked into the matter came to the conclusion that 2G spectrum was “sold like cinema tickets”, the bench observed this aspect was also “substantially supported by the finance secretary”.
At one point, when the judges asked whether licences could be cancelled at this stage, or whether the licences of those who had not rolled out their services would be regularised, Mr Bhushan and Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy, who also had moved an identical PIL, said the same could be cancelled as TRAI had specifically said the companies were “obliged” under the law to roll out services within the stipulated time frame. At this the bench merely said, “We are not suggesting anything but we are asking.”
The bench later dictated a brief order citing the November 18, 2010 letter from TRAI to DoT stating that many licensees had neither complied with rollout obligations, nor provided the service, hence “we deem it fit to entertain and accept the request of the counsel and accordingly make TRAI, through its secretary, a party to the case”. It listed the next hearing in the matter for February 1.
The CPIL and the seven petitioners though had demanded the cancellation of all 122 licences, alleging that the notices sent to 69 allottees under the aegis of new telecom minister Kapil Sibal was nothing but an attempt to “obfuscate” the entire issue.