Apex court reserves order on petition against CVC’s appoitment
11 Feb 2011
The Supreme Court today reserved its order on a petition challenging PJ Thomas's appointment as Central Vigilance Commissioner.
On the government's behalf, attorney general G E Vahanvati denied the allegations of Thomas's appointment being pre-decided. Further, the government argued that appointment to a statutory post like that of the CVC could be challenged only in case of a violation of the statute.
According to the government, in the case in question, the government could not intervene as the statute did not say that a person who had been chargesheeted could not be appointed.
Arguing on behalf of the petitioner, Prashant Bhushan argued that the SC needed to lay down some guidelines, outlining a method to prepare the shortlist of candidates with high ranking officials such as the cabinet secretary preparing it (the shortlist). Earlier this week, the embattled CVC had contended to the SC that his appointment could not be subjected to judicial review.
Counsel for CVC KK Venugopal told a bench that many MPs had serious charges against them, but they were the people making laws, a submission which was seen as a blame game started by Thomas.
Contending that all chargesheeted persons could not be painted with the same brush, Venugopal said law had taken a different view with respect to disqualification of MPs.
Referring to the electoral law according to which a mere filing of chargesheet in a criminal or corruption case against did not disqualify a person from contesting elections, Venugopal contended that a person is rendered ineligible to contest only after his conviction in the case.
