Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea challenging the appointments of Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) K.V. Chaudhary and Vigilance Commissioner (VC) T.M. Bhasin. The petition alleged that they did not have a “clean record” and a non-transparent procedure was followed while appointing them. It was submitted in the plea that Chowdary and Bhasin’s appointments were arbitrary and violated the principle of institutional integrity. But, in a huge relief to the centre, the SC found that that there were no grounds to interfere with the appointments of Chowdary and Bhasin.
ARGUMENTS OF THE PETITIONERS
The two PIL’s were filed by the NGO Common cause and Centre for Integrity, Governance and Training in Vigilance Administration. Prashant Bhushan representing the NGO argued that both Chowdary and Bhasin had blemished records and could not be said to have had impeccable integrity and challenged their appointment stating that the appointments were non transparent. Bhushan submitted that when Chowdary led the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), he made little progress in the investigation against people who allegedly had illegal offshore accounts with HSBC in the 2015-16 case. He also argued that Chowdary has also been linked with former Central Bureau of Investigation director Ranjit Sinha — who is being investigated for allegedly scuttling the probe in the UPA-era coal scam. Earlier in January, the CBI informed the top court that it would investigate the bank account details of all those whose name features in the infamous visitors log recovered from Sinha’s official residence. Chowdary’s name features several times in those logs.
Bhushan suggested that Chowdary and Sinha mutually gave each other a clean chit in the respective investigations against them by their departments. In Bhasin’s case, Common Cause submitted that in 2013, the CVC had indicted him for forging and tampering a report against the former general manager of the Indian Bank.
ARGUMENTS OF THE GOVERNMENT
The Centre defended the appointments submitting that the candidates were thoroughly vetted before being shortlisted. Appearing for the Centre, attorney general K.K. Venugopal countered allegations made against Chowdary and Bhasin suggesting that aspersions could not be cast against people in such posts. Moreover, Chowdary and Bhasin were further cleared by various agencies before their appointment came through. The Centre added that the selection committee considered every aspect of the candidates before shortlisting them. The government had even submitted all the original records pertaining to the appointments made.
THE JUDGMENT
The Supreme Court questioned the selections saying that the appointment to such high posts is a serious issue. The persons having impeccable integrity have not been selected because they did not apply.
But, upholding the appointments the court held that “we find no reason to quash the appointments”
86540
103860
630
114
59824