Med scam: CJI paves way for removal of HC judge
Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com
New Delhi: Finding substance in allegations against the Allahabad high court’s Justice S N Shukla related to the medical admission scam, a threejudge in-house committee has recommended his removal to CJI Dipak Misra.
Acting on the committee’s recommendations and as per paragraph 7(i) of the in-house procedure, the CJI advised Justice Shukla to either resign or take voluntary retirement. However, Justice Shukla refused to do either. Left with no option, the CJI advised the HC chief justice to withdraw judicial work from Justice Shukla with immediate effect, a step which can clear the way for his removal and for the CBI to register a case against him in connection with the medical admission scam. Justice Shukla, while heading a division bench, allegedly defied restraint orders passed by a CJI-led bench last year to permit private colleges to admit students for the 2017-18 academic year. Two complaints, including one from the advocate general of the state, were received by the CJI on September 1, 2017 and he set up an inhouse panel comprising Madras HC CJ Indira Banerjee, Sikkim HC CJ S K Agnihotri and MP HC Justice P K Jaiswal.
Oppn keen on House debate on SC friction
The controversy over the Supreme Court appears set for escalation, with political parties, including a ruling NDA ally, seeking discussion in the Parliament on issues emanating from the public outburst of the four seniormost judges of the apex court, reports Subodh Ghildiyal. Akali Dal MP Naresh Gujral has asked the government to allocate time to discuss the crisis.P 14
‘ Judge had disgraced the values of judicial life ’
Two complaints, including one from the advocate general of the state, was received by the CJI on September 1 last year and he set up an in-house committee comprising Madras HC CJ Indira Banerjee, Sikkim HC CJ S K Agnihotri and MP HC Justice P K Jaiswal.
The inquiry committee said Justice Shukla had “disgraced the values of judicial life, acted in a manner unbecoming of a judge”, lowered the “majesty, dignity and credibility of his office” and acted in breach of his oath of office.
As per paragraph 7(ii) of the in-house procedure, the CJI will now recommend initiation of removal proceedings against Justice Shukla. Paragraph 7(ii) provides, “In case the judge expresses unwillingness to resign or seek voluntary retirement, the chief justice of the high court concerned should be advised by the Chief Justice of India not to allocate any judicial work to the judge concerned and the President and the Prime Minister shall be intimated that this had been done because allegations against the judge were found by the committee to be so serious as to warrant initiation of proceedings for removal.”
Once the CJI writes to the President and the PM recommending removal of an HC judge, the Rajya Sabha chairperson, who is also the Vice-President, appoints a threejudge inquiry panel in consultation with the CJI under the Judges (Enquiry) Act, 1968, to look into the allegations examined by the inhouse committee. This inquiry panel will examine evidence and record finding which will form the basis for whether or not removal motion be debated in Rajya Sabha.
Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com
New Delhi: Finding substance in allegations against the Allahabad high court’s Justice S N Shukla related to the medical admission scam, a threejudge in-house committee has recommended his removal to CJI Dipak Misra.
Acting on the committee’s recommendations and as per paragraph 7(i) of the in-house procedure, the CJI advised Justice Shukla to either resign or take voluntary retirement. However, Justice Shukla refused to do either. Left with no option, the CJI advised the HC chief justice to withdraw judicial work from Justice Shukla with immediate effect, a step which can clear the way for his removal and for the CBI to register a case against him in connection with the medical admission scam. Justice Shukla, while heading a division bench, allegedly defied restraint orders passed by a CJI-led bench last year to permit private colleges to admit students for the 2017-18 academic year. Two complaints, including one from the advocate general of the state, were received by the CJI on September 1, 2017 and he set up an inhouse panel comprising Madras HC CJ Indira Banerjee, Sikkim HC CJ S K Agnihotri and MP HC Justice P K Jaiswal.
Oppn keen on House debate on SC friction
The controversy over the Supreme Court appears set for escalation, with political parties, including a ruling NDA ally, seeking discussion in the Parliament on issues emanating from the public outburst of the four seniormost judges of the apex court, reports Subodh Ghildiyal. Akali Dal MP Naresh Gujral has asked the government to allocate time to discuss the crisis.P 14
‘ Judge had disgraced the values of judicial life ’
Two complaints, including one from the advocate general of the state, was received by the CJI on September 1 last year and he set up an in-house committee comprising Madras HC CJ Indira Banerjee, Sikkim HC CJ S K Agnihotri and MP HC Justice P K Jaiswal.
The inquiry committee said Justice Shukla had “disgraced the values of judicial life, acted in a manner unbecoming of a judge”, lowered the “majesty, dignity and credibility of his office” and acted in breach of his oath of office.
As per paragraph 7(ii) of the in-house procedure, the CJI will now recommend initiation of removal proceedings against Justice Shukla. Paragraph 7(ii) provides, “In case the judge expresses unwillingness to resign or seek voluntary retirement, the chief justice of the high court concerned should be advised by the Chief Justice of India not to allocate any judicial work to the judge concerned and the President and the Prime Minister shall be intimated that this had been done because allegations against the judge were found by the committee to be so serious as to warrant initiation of proceedings for removal.”
Once the CJI writes to the President and the PM recommending removal of an HC judge, the Rajya Sabha chairperson, who is also the Vice-President, appoints a threejudge inquiry panel in consultation with the CJI under the Judges (Enquiry) Act, 1968, to look into the allegations examined by the inhouse committee. This inquiry panel will examine evidence and record finding which will form the basis for whether or not removal motion be debated in Rajya Sabha.
No comments:
Post a Comment