Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The hearing on CBI Director Alok Kumar Verma’s challenge to the October 23 orders of the CVC and the central government divesting him of his powers and responsibilities commenced in the Supreme Court on Thursday while Senior Advocate Fali S.Nariman drew the bench attention to the apex court’s judgment in the Jain Hawala case (1997), the scheme of the CVC Act of 2003 and the consequential amendments in the special Police Establishments Act of 1946.
In the Vineet Narain case, it was stated that the CVC shall be entrusted with the responsibility of superintendence over the CBI’s functioning that the Director,CBI shall have a minimum tenure of two years, regardless of the date of his superannuation ,and that the transfer of an incumbent Director, in an extraordinary situation, including the need for him to take up a more important assignment should have the approval of the Selection Committee, which was supposed to be headed by the Central Vigilance Commissioner, with the Home Secretary and secretary(personnel) as members .It was subsequent incorporated into the law with the introduction of CVC Act 2003 amending the DSPE Act.
In the beginning Mr. Nariman also urged the bench to consider 2012 constitution bench judgment of the apex court, under the Chief Justice-ship of Justice S.H.Kapadia, in Sahara India Real Estate v. SEBI for the postponement of publication of any matter if the interest of justice demands.
86540
103860
630
114
59824