Supreme Court Dismisses Union of India's Appeal in 2G Spectrum Case -- Clarifies Reserve Price Payment Timeline Under Supreme Court Orders -- TDSAT Order Upheld with Corrected Interpretation

  • 53
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court addressed an appeal by the Union of India against a TDSAT order regarding payment of reserve price by Sistema Shyam Teleservices Limited for continued operations after the quashing of 2G licences. The Court's judgment in Centre for Public Interest Litigation vs. Union of India (2012) had declared licences illegal and ordered Spectrum auction. Subsequent orders allowed temporary continuation of services and imposed costs. The key order dated 15.02.2013 required licensees who continued operations after 02.02.2012 to pay reserve price from the November 2012 auction. The DoT issued demand notices, but the TDSAT interpreted the starting date for payment as 02.02.2012. The Supreme Court held this interpretation wrong, clarifying that liability commences from 15.02.2013. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the TDSAT's disposal but correcting the legal basis.

Headnote

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Union of India against the order of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) -- The TDSAT had disposed of Telecommunication Petition No. 63 of 2016 filed by Sistema Shyam Teleservices Limited -- The dispute arose from the Supreme Court's judgment dated 02.02.2012 in Centre for Public Interest Litigation vs. Union of India, which quashed Unified Access Service licences and 2G Spectrum allotments -- The Court had ordered auction of Spectrum and allowed existing licensees to continue operations temporarily -- Subsequent orders, particularly dated 15.02.2013, directed licensees who continued operations after 02.02.2012 to pay reserve price fixed for the November 2012 auction -- The Department of Telecommunication issued demand notices to the respondent for payment -- The TDSAT interpreted the order to require payment from 02.02.2012, but the Supreme Court held this interpretation erroneous -- The Court clarified that liability arises from the date of the order, i.e., 15.02.2013, not retrospectively from 02.02.2012 -- The appeal was dismissed, upholding the TDSAT's disposal but correcting the legal interpretation

Issue of Consideration: The Issue of the starting date for payment of reserve price by licensees who continued operations after the quashing of 2G licences, as per the Supreme Court's order dated 15.02.2013

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the TDSAT's disposal of the petition but correcting the interpretation that payment starts from 02.02.2012, holding it commences from 15.02.2013

2026 LawText (SC) (02) 50

Civil Appeal No. 12219 of 2018

2026-02-20

SANJAY KUMAR J. , K. VINOD CHANDRAN J.

2026 INSC 174

Union of India

Sistema Shyam Teleservices Limited

Nature of Litigation: Civil appeal against TDSAT order regarding payment of reserve price for continued telecom operations after quashing of licences

Remedy Sought

Union of India sought reversal of TDSAT order that disposed of petition regarding demand notices for reserve price payment

Filing Reason

Appeal filed due to alleged erroneous interpretation by TDSAT of Supreme Court order dated 15.02.2013 on payment timeline

Previous Decisions

Supreme Court judgment dated 02.02.2012 quashed licences; orders dated 15.02.2013 and 11.03.2013 provided for auction and temporary operations; TDSAT order dated 10.05.2018 disposed of petition with directions

Issues

Whether the TDSAT correctly interpreted the starting date for payment of reserve price under the Supreme Court's order dated 15.02.2013 Whether the demand notices issued by DoT were valid based on the correct interpretation of judicial orders

Submissions/Arguments

Union of India argued TDSAT misinterpreted the order, leading to incorrect liability assessment Respondent likely contested demand notices as per TDSAT order

Ratio Decidendi

Judicial orders must be interpreted based on their explicit terms; liability for reserve price payment under the order dated 15.02.2013 arises from the date of the order, not retrospectively from the quashing date of 02.02.2012, unless specified otherwise

Judgment Excerpts

'The TDSAT opined that this Court had not specified the date from which the reserve price was to be paid. Based on this understanding, which we find to be wholly erroneous, the TDSAT opined...' -- Para 7 '(iii) Such of the licensees, who continued operation after 2.2.2012, whether or not they gave bid in the auction conducted on 12.11.2012 and 14.11.2012, shall pay the reserve price fixed by the Government for the purpose of conducting auction in November 2012.' -- Para 3

Procedural History

Judgment dated 02.02.2012 quashed licences; orders on I.A. Nos. 5, 8, 11 extended timelines; order dated 15.02.2013 directed reserve price payment; DoT issued show-cause and demand notices; respondent filed TDSAT petition; TDSAT order dated 10.05.2018 disposed of petition; Union of India filed appeal to Supreme Court

Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Union of India's Appeal in 2G Spectrum Case -- Clarifies...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Allows Writ Petition Quashing Recovery Order Against Retired Teacher ...