Today nation is divided on what approach is known as accountability. The policy guidelines are not affirmative then every individual will disobey the law. So let me clarify first why 2G spectrum policy is an honest policy then I will explain what is the approach to be taken by the government.
In the space and in the air
In the water and in the sky
In the emblem and in the digits
The nature of sun and nature of moon
The beauty of hurricane and normality of sustenance
The judgement of impartiality and the courage of victims
The thread of sign board and water level in dams
The wine in bar and creative forces in temple
The edge of sword and the courage of disturbed aliments
The system of dilute wishes and the system of writing methods
The incentive of red alert and synonym of agriculture
The judgment of justification and judgement of view
The writing of in pertaining able soil and waitress in the appropriate tension
So my point in the 2g spectrum the governing counsel followed the words of nature rather than policies of guidelines mentioned in the articulate format of spectrum contractual agreement.
This means
1. Those people who do not accept wealth based on biased information is regarded as judgmental
2. The fight of arrogance has to be underestimated through caution of systematic knowledge
3. The written document has to be disobeyed if it does not adhere to constitutional framework of criteria of allocation
Let me get deeper to pinpoint each answer to Arun Jaitley
1. Spectrum allocation has to be done throw mechanism of digital outlook information. Noting it with allocation by fixed price norms is relatively agreeable. The reason for this is, the integral system of nature has three major inter supportive indecent criteria
a. The honored principle of applicability
b. Criteria for an organized system of information
c. The support of digital transformation
d. The ethical guidelines of recurring portions of systematic misfunctioning
Noting these points there is another major component for spectrum allocation.
It is known as variable intrigue portion related to supplement dis continental value.
The changes of dates are normal functioning because those who are not acknowledged by dates will not follow the strict guidelines. The changes are repeated throughout the interfacial dynamic changes that pertain able and acceptable.
Hence every caution has been taken to offset the period through normality in governance. Hence the change of date is not adversely effective in dealing with spectrum allocation.
The determining factor for spectrum allocation is not based on pertaining portions of the contractual agreement but based on rigorous study of statistics. This is because of the leveling of information if carried through dishonored principles it will only lead to failure of the proposal. The judgement is highly acknowledgeable because of systematic governance cannot lead to mishandling portion of a dilemma. Hence I preclude the judgement given is at best possible highest level judicial honesty.
Coming to his next question what is the reason to inform few people before the allocation period so as to supplement the changes in the governing policy. He has cited about demand draft.
So let me explain what happened in the true democratic allocation of returnable withheld values.
The government spent a lot of time in bringing the rigorous information through digital occurrence. But the right and left parties pressurized the governing council to follow the guidelines and award it to the best bid. But if that is allowed to participate then the changes in the often criteria are rescheduled through the implementation of criteria level of systematic failure. So the tendency is not through better lament sector but through the informed decision. This could have been avoided in case the left and right politicians did not pressurize the government. So having said that in case of disproportionate allocation then the waitress is not given the priority.
So in principle, the 2g spectrum has been implemented in the best possible acceptable way.
Coming to next question what is the need for diluting the information in the agreed portions.
The answer is simple
Today there could be governing body making a relative pressurized judgement but that does not mean every direct change is equally culpable. Hence with this information, they have followed the allocation process.
Saying I want to mention three more points missed by honored court of India
1. Any honored mechanism cannot over relate its appearance
2. Every informal sector is based on principles of latest improvements
3. Every system integration is only based on changes to overly active disturbance
I think I have answered all his questions in my best understandability. For remaining questions of his, he can contact the honorable Judge who pronounced the judgement.
Thank you
Karnati Kiran