New Delhi, Mar 3 : The Supreme Court today decided that Central Vigilance Commissioner PJ Thomas's appointment was illegal.
The apex court pronounced its verdict on a petition challenging the appointment of P.J. Thomas as the head of the country's anti-corruption watchdog, Central Vigilance Commission. The bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia, Justice K.S. Panicker Radhakrishnan and Justice Swatanter Kumar said the government had ignored the corruption taints on Thomas while appointing him. The bench said the facts of the Palmolein Oil case were not mentioned in Thomas's biodata.
It said that the high-powered committee's recommendation on the appointment of Thomas "does not exist in law". The committee, for whatsoever reason, failed to consider relevant material recommending action against Thomas, the bench said.
The court further rejected the government's contention that vigilance clearance given by the CVC in 2008 was the basis for empanelment of Thomas as a candidate for the post of CVC.
"The committee and no government authority focused on the larger issue of institutional integrity of the office of CVC while recommending the name of Thomas," said the SC bench.
The apex court bench said the touchstone for the appointment of the CVC is the institutional integrity as well as the personal integrity of the candidate. It added that all future appointment should not be restricted to civil servants alone but people of impeccable integrity from other fields should also be considered.
In what had turned into a war of words over the past few months, the Court rejected Thomas' contention that theappointment of the CVC cannot be brought under judicial review. The SC said the legality of the recommendation can be brought under judicial review.
According to the petition filed in the Supreme Court, Thomas was facing a criminal charge sheet in a case related to palm oil import in Kerala and he was not an "outstanding civil servant of impeccable integrity".
The court indicated that it may lay further guidelines for making the appointment of the CVC more transparent and making the selection process more criterion based.
Chief Justice Kapadia said that he did not want that the matter (of the CVC's appointment) to come back to the court again and again.
The court also suggested that it may speak about the criterion for the preparation of a panel of three candidates for appointment as the CVC.
The petitioner argued that the moment the process of selecting the panel is initiated by the department of personnel and training, the service details of the civil servants under consideration, including their stint in their cadre states, should be taken into account and not just their brief bio-data of their posting in the central government.
Source: IANS/India Syndicate
0 comments:
Post a Comment