2G verdict: DMK asks govt to file review petition in SC
In an apparent move to put pressure on UPA on 2G spectrum issue which continued to haunt it, DMK today asked the government to file a review petition in the Supreme Court against its verdict cancelling 122 telecom licences.india Updated: Oct 01, 2012 22:34 IST
In an apparent move to put pressure on UPA on 2G spectrum issue which continued to haunt it, DMK on Monday asked the government to file a review petition in the Supreme Court against its verdict cancelling 122 telecom licences.
UPA's second largest partner made the significant demand at its emergency executive in Chennai citing the recent opinion of the Supreme Court on the presidential reference on auction of natural resources.
"...problems relating spectrum allocation will continue further because of the Supreme Court order", said a resolution passed by the party whose leaders Kanimozhi, daughter of DMK patriarch M Karunanidhi and A Raja, former telecom minister, are facing the 2G heat.
In its opinion last week on the presidential reference, the Supreme Court had held that auction was not the only method of allocating natural resources to private companies and made it clear that its 2G verdict was confined to spectrum and not to other resources.
Noting that the government had withdrawn a review petition challenging the cancellation of 122 licences after the Presidential Referrence was moved, a resolution adopted at the meeting insisted that the petition be filed again immediately.
Karunanidhi's grandnephew Dayanidhi Maran, also a former telecom minister, is also facing corruption charges relating to a telecom deal during his tenure.
The resolution said the review petition challenging the verdict of the two-judge bench of the apex court had stated the decision to allocate spectrum on first-come-first-serve basis was adopted following the 1999 Telecom Policy which formed the basis for the 2007 decision also.
It said the petition had also contended that the aim of first-come-first serve basis was to provide telecom services to people at affordable costs and the court's intervention was therefore "unconstitutional".
"In the explanation given by the five-judge bench on the presidential reference, the court said it was not necessary to auction resources other than spectrum. Because of this, problems pertaining to spectrum allocation further continue."