NEW DELHI: Just 13 days after it argued that the Rafale deal 's pricing details could not be revealed, the government shed its reluctance and placed before the Supreme Court in sealed cover top secret information on the cost of the 36 fighter jets, an issue that has seen opposition parties allege a scam in the acquisition.The sealed envelope came from the defence ministry and was taken straight to SC secretary general Ravindra Maithani's office on Monday, instead of the usual mode of getting it filed in the registry. Even attorney general KK Venugopal was not shown the contents of the report.The change of stance is understood to have come about after discussions at senior levels of the government and BJP where it was felt that submitting pricing details under sealed cover only for the SC's scrutiny would help dispel any doubts over the deal and counter opposition allegations in election season.Sources said the government's reluctance to share pricing details was meant to impress upon the court the sensitivity of such details in defence purchases."It was meant only for the eyes of the Chief Justice of India and his companion judge(s) on the bench that is hearing the PILs questioning the rationale behind the NDA government going for 36 Rafale jets in flyaway condition as compared to the UPA government's decision to procure 126 Rafale aircraft from French company Dassault," ministry sources told TOI.The SC was scheduled to hear three PILs on Monday - two by advocates ML Sharma and Vineet Dhanada and a joint petition by ex-ministers Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie and lawyer-activist Prashant Bhushan . Sinha, Shourie and Bhushan have also filed a complaint with the CBI alleging a scam in the deal.On October 31, a bench of CJI Ranjan Gogoi and Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph had ordered, "The court would like to be apprised of the details with regard to the pricing/cost, particularly, the advantage thereof, if any, which again will be submitted to the court in sealed cover." This was a shift from the bench's view on October 10, when, while seeking details of the decision-making process, it had clarified that these "would not cover the issue of pricing or the question of technical suitability" of the fighters.