RELIANCE TELECOM LTD. & ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

Citation: [2017] 4 S.C.R. 972 · Decided: 12-01-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 12 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2017] 4 S.C.R. 972 
RELIANCE TELECOM LTD. & ANR. 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 
(Transfer Case (Civil) No. 43 of 2015) 
JANUARY 12, 2017 
[DIPAK MISRA AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.) 
Telecommunication: 
Spectrum auction - For allocation of spectrums in various 
C areas - Notice Inviting Application-2015 (NlA) - Terms and 
conditions of - Set by Central Government for the auction -
Challenged by participants in the NlA (telecom service providers) 
before High Courts - Interim orders by High Court - Supreme Court, 
in Special Leave Petition stayed order of High Court and permitted 
D the auction to continue - Cases Pending before High Courts 
transferred to Supreme Court - Court granted liberty to Central 
Government to finalize the auction - Plea inter alia that eligibility 
criteria of minimum bidding for different categories of bidders under 
different bands attracts the frown of Art. 14 of Constitution and 
E 
F 
that principle of capping keeps the petitioners away from bidding 
in respect of a particular quantum and makes the bid non-competitive 
- Held: The challenge pertaining to tender conditions formulated 
by the Central Government is not tenable as no valid grounds for 
interference have been made out -
The endeavour of the 
Government in the NIA is not based on any classification except 
that all service providers must have a minimum of 5 MHz of spectrum 
in order to deploy mobile technology - However, even if it is assumed 
that there is classification, the classification of entities is on the 
basis of two sets of people i.e. (1) new entrants including the expiring 
licensees and (2) existing licensees both of whom ought to have 
minimum 5 MHz so as to enable to deploy on any mobile technology 
G - Such classification is based on intelligible differentia having a 
nexus with the object sought to be achieved and there is no violation 
of Art. 14 - Capping has been kept in vogue to have a bigger field 
and it is based on a rational principle to avoid monopoly and to 
create a healthy competitive bidding - The decision of Central 
Government is based on certain norms and parameters - It is a 
H 
972 
RELIANCE TELECOM LTD. & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & 
973 
ANR. 
policy decision which subserves the consumers' interest - Decision 
A 
to conduct the auction cannot be said to be mala fide or based on 
extraneous considerations - Constitution of India - Art. 14. 
Deeds and Documents: 
Notice Inviting Application (NIA) - Interpretation of Held: 
NIA being an invitation to offer, the rules of interpretation of B 
contracts would apply and not the rules that may be applied in the 
case of interpretation of statutes - In case of difference of opinion 
in the manner of interpretation, it is the interpretation of the party 
who is offering the contract ought to be adopted - Court, by way of 
mandamus, cannot require the State to interpret the clause in a given c 
way - Court can interpret the clause contrary to the way of 
interpretation by the offering party or literal interpretation, only 
on the limited grounds of judicial review by striking down the clause 
as arbitrary - Contract - Interpretation of Statutes. 
Legitimate Expectation: 
Concept of legitimate expectation has no role to play where 
State action is as a public policy or in public interest, unless the 
action taken amounts to an abuse of po,/;er. 
Judicial Review: 
Scope of judicial review - In respect of policy decisions in 
E 
fiscal matters - Held: The Court cannot get and dwell as an appellate 
authority into complex economic issues in exercise of power of 
judicial review- In the matters relating to complex auction procedure 
having enormous financial ramification, interference by Court can . 
lead to· a situation which is not warrantable and may have F 
unforeseen adverse impact effecting fiscal imbalance - Interference 
in such auction should be only on the ground of stricter scrutiny, 
when the decision making process smacks of obnoxious 
arbitrariness or any extraneous consideration. 
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 2003: 
s.11 (J)(a) - Recommendations under - By Telecom Regulatory 
Authority of India - Whether binding on Central Government -
Held: Recommendations given u/s. 11 (l)(a) are not binding but 
deserve to be given due weightage. 
G 
H 
974 
A 
B 
c 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 4 S.C.R. 
Dismissing the cases, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The question of alteration of bid condition does 
not survive, as the petitioners have participated

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.