New Delhi, Dec. 19 -- The Union government on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to exercise restraint on a public interest litigation questioning the law that allows "unopposed" candidates an automatic entry into Parliament and state assemblies, arguing that even PILs with "good ideas" should first be examined by the executive before inviting judicial intervention. Appearing before a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, solicitor general Tushar Mehta submitted that policy ideas, even if academically sound or backed by research, may not meet the threshold for judicial scrutiny when petitioners bypass the government and approach the court directly. "Someone may have a good idea, but it may not be a good trend to approach courts directly without first going to the government. It is like someone developing a good idea only to file a petition in court. That may not be the right approach. The government should get to examine such ideas first," Mehta told the bench, which also comprised justice Joymalya Bagchi. The bench, however, indicated that it was inclined to examine the issue, observing that the petition raised "interesting points". "We are examining this since the petition raises some interesting issues," the court said. At this stage, attorney general R Venkataramani, also appearing for the Union government, supported the submissions of the solicitor general and reiterated the Centre's stand that the issue was largely "academic" and did not merit judicial interference. The court deferred further hearing in the matter to January. The petition has been filed by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. The PIL has challenged the legal framework under Section 53(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which provides for the direct election of a candidate when there is no contest, raising questions about whether voters are denied the right to express dissent, including through the "none of the above" (NOTA) option....