The NGO, Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) and Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy, on whose PILs the court had held that natural resources in all sectors should be allocated through auction, submitted "the propositions laid down in the February 2 verdict of the apex court is in public interest" and the Presidential reference can be returned unanswered.
They said answering the reference would give an impression that the verdict was wrongly decided and also amounts that the executive function was being "outsourced" to the court rather than taking a decision to implement directions in the verdict.
However, a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia, was in disagreement with CPIL's counsel Prashant Bhushan that the Presidential reference should be rejected on the ground that "the reference is malafide".
"We can't reject the reference on the ground that it is malafide and misleading. The last sentence (in Bhushan's submission) is unwarranted," said the bench, also comprising justices D K Jain, J S Khehar, Dipak Mishra and Ranjan Gogai.
Swamy also raised the question on maintainability of the refrence saying the Centre lost the judicial forum for addressing its grievances when it withdrew its review petition against the February 2 verdict and since the trial in the 2G spectrum scam was on it will have a "deep impact on it and can cause impediment" if the reference was entertained.
"For these two reasons, there is nothing to be lost if this reference is returned," Swamy said adding if there was any need to go into issues concerning allocation of natural resources, a fresh reference could be considered in future after completion of trial in the 2G scam case.
