Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
It is known that the Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi recused himself from hearing by reasoning that he would be a part of the High Powered Committee for the appointment of new CBI Director. Now, Justice AK Sikri recused himself from hearing the matter by stating that he had his predicaments, and this caused despair in the petitioner. Hence, the matter is now listed on January 24.
Dushyant Dave, senior advocate appearing for the petitioners—NGO Common Cause and RTI Activist Anjali Bharadwaj, expressed his concern over the matter not being heard on the day. Besides, in view of the speculations in the society, Justice AK Sikri revoked his consent to the nomination to the CSAT at London. The petition stated that the appointment was not made in accordance with the recommendations of the High Powered Committee. The petitioner contended that the appointment committee of the Cabinet chose Nageshwar Rao as the interim Director of the CBI despite SC quashing its order of the appointment previously. Thus, the appointment was not made in accordance with the provisions of the Delhi Police Establishment Act.
RTI activist, who is a co-petitioner in the case, expressed the absence of transparency in the appointment process of the CBI Director. Since the appointment contravenes the provisions of the DSPE Act, the appointment is illegal and arbitrary. The petition also stated that the government exercises undue influence over the matter, which undermines the integrity and independence of the institution.
The petitioner also sought mechanisms for ensuring transparency in the process of the appointment of the CBI Director. The RTI activist said that the Union Government sent the same summarized response to every RTI Applicant, who had sought information in this regard.
86540
103860
630
114
59824