Verdict today on validity of Thomas' appointment as CVC
J. VenkatesanRelated
NEWS
Inquiry about documents irrelevant: Thomas Committee did discuss Thomas, Palmolein case: Chidambaram Sushma dismisses Chidambaram’s statement on Thomas issue Full facts about Thomas were not placed before panel: Vahanvati Thomas justifies his appointment as CVC Centre defends Thomas' appointmentHe does not fulfil criterion of impeccable integrity: petitioners
The Supreme Court will give its verdict on Thursday on petitions challenging the appointment of P.J. Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner on the ground that he did not fulfil the criterion of “impeccable integrity” as a charge sheet was pending against him.
On February 10, a three-Judge Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and Swatanter Kumar reserved verdict on petitions filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation and J.M. Lyngdoh and others challenging the appointment of Mr. Thomas.
On Thursday, the judgment is to be pronounced by the CJI.
The petitioners had argued that arbitrariness or mala fide action would vitiate the process of appointment. Since non-circulation of relevant materials before the committee headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had emerged during the hearing of the petition, the appointment of Mr. Thomas should be set aside.
“Clearance given”
The Centre had maintained that there were no standard procedures or guidelines on preparation of the panel of names for appointment of the CVC. In the case of Mr. Thomas, the Central Vigilance Commission had given clearance and on that basis he was appointed Chief Secretary of Kerala. Once a person is appointed Secretary on clearance by the Commission, he could be considered for empanelment and no further inquiry was required.
On behalf of Mr. Thomas, it was argued that mere pendency of a charge sheet could not be held against him. Further, irrespective of placement of all materials before the high power committee, the process of appointment would not be vitiated as the consultation process was independent of the material placed before the panel. The integrity of Mr. Thomas could not be a subject matter of judicial review, it was submitted.
NEWS
Inquiry about documents irrelevant: Thomas Committee did discuss Thomas, Palmolein case: Chidambaram Sushma dismisses Chidambaram’s statement on Thomas issue Full facts about Thomas were not placed before panel: Vahanvati Thomas justifies his appointment as CVC Centre defends Thomas' appointmentHe does not fulfil criterion of impeccable integrity: petitioners
The Supreme Court will give its verdict on Thursday on petitions challenging the appointment of P.J. Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner on the ground that he did not fulfil the criterion of “impeccable integrity” as a charge sheet was pending against him.
On February 10, a three-Judge Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and Swatanter Kumar reserved verdict on petitions filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation and J.M. Lyngdoh and others challenging the appointment of Mr. Thomas.
On Thursday, the judgment is to be pronounced by the CJI.
The petitioners had argued that arbitrariness or mala fide action would vitiate the process of appointment. Since non-circulation of relevant materials before the committee headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had emerged during the hearing of the petition, the appointment of Mr. Thomas should be set aside.
“Clearance given”
The Centre had maintained that there were no standard procedures or guidelines on preparation of the panel of names for appointment of the CVC. In the case of Mr. Thomas, the Central Vigilance Commission had given clearance and on that basis he was appointed Chief Secretary of Kerala. Once a person is appointed Secretary on clearance by the Commission, he could be considered for empanelment and no further inquiry was required.
On behalf of Mr. Thomas, it was argued that mere pendency of a charge sheet could not be held against him. Further, irrespective of placement of all materials before the high power committee, the process of appointment would not be vitiated as the consultation process was independent of the material placed before the panel. The integrity of Mr. Thomas could not be a subject matter of judicial review, it was submitted.
Chandy owes an apology, says Isaac
Staff Reporter:Finance Minster T.M. Thomas Isaac has urged Leader of the Opposition Oommen Chandy to tender a public apology in the wake of the recent letter from Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram on the State's request to ban Bhutan and Sikkim lotteries for alleged violations of Lottery Act and Rules.
Addressing a press meet here on Thursday, Dr. Isaac said Mr. Chidambaram, in reply to the letter written by him on January 27, has stated that “since the State and Union governments are party to the court cases and the matter is sub-judice, no interim decisions can be taken.”
The Union Minister has subsequently said in the letter dated March 3 that it is of great dismay and concern that the State has gone to the extent of the filing a case against the Centre even when similar matters are not only sub-judice in various courts but are under consideration in the ministry as well.
The Finance Minister took strong objection to Mr. Chidambaram's statement that “it is for the State government to decide whether it wants to resolve various issues vis-à-vis the other organising States with the assistance of this Ministry or to agitate the matter in a court of law.” Dr. Isaac said Mr. Chandy and KPCC president Ramesh Chenithala, who had been blaming the State of inaction, should come forward and explain their stand in the wake of the letter from the Union Home Minister.
Dr. Isaac alleged that the minutes of the hearing convened in New Delhi on February 23 this year as prescribed under the Lottery Acts and Rules in the case of Bhutan had been manipulated. “The officials and the tax consultant who represented the State had given it in writing that the lotteries of Sikkim and Bhutan should be banned. We had also replied that the minutes had been manipulated,” he said.
“It is now clear that Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan is being made the target,” he added. The Union Minister, in his letter, has said that the State's request for amendment of the Act to delegate powers under Section 6 of the Lottery (Regulation) Act 1998 to decide on the entry of lotteries from other States and banning all forms of online lotteries is not desirable as the chances of the same being misused to ban lotteries in other States is very high.
Chandy owes an apology, says Isaac
Staff Reporter:Finance Minster T.M. Thomas Isaac has urged Leader of the Opposition Oommen Chandy to tender a public apology in the wake of the recent letter from Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram on the State's request to ban Bhutan and Sikkim lotteries for alleged violations of Lottery Act and Rules.
Addressing a press meet here on Thursday, Dr. Isaac said Mr. Chidambaram, in reply to the letter written by him on January 27, has stated that “since the State and Union governments are party to the court cases and the matter is sub-judice, no interim decisions can be taken.”
The Union Minister has subsequently said in the letter dated March 3 that it is of great dismay and concern that the State has gone to the extent of the filing a case against the Centre even when similar matters are not only sub-judice in various courts but are under consideration in the ministry as well.
The Finance Minister took strong objection to Mr. Chidambaram's statement that “it is for the State government to decide whether it wants to resolve various issues vis-à-vis the other organising States with the assistance of this Ministry or to agitate the matter in a court of law.” Dr. Isaac said Mr. Chandy and KPCC president Ramesh Chenithala, who had been blaming the State of inaction, should come forward and explain their stand in the wake of the letter from the Union Home Minister.
Dr. Isaac alleged that the minutes of the hearing convened in New Delhi on February 23 this year as prescribed under the Lottery Acts and Rules in the case of Bhutan had been manipulated. “The officials and the tax consultant who represented the State had given it in writing that the lotteries of Sikkim and Bhutan should be banned. We had also replied that the minutes had been manipulated,” he said.
“It is now clear that Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan is being made the target,” he added. The Union Minister, in his letter, has said that the State's request for amendment of the Act to delegate powers under Section 6 of the Lottery (Regulation) Act 1998 to decide on the entry of lotteries from other States and banning all forms of online lotteries is not desirable as the chances of the same being misused to ban lotteries in other States is very high.
No comments:
Post a Comment