New Delhi. The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha Secretariat on the petition of Justice Yashwant Verma, in which he has questioned the decision of the Speaker of the Lower House. Justice Yashwant has argued that the procedure followed in this case was not proper.
To whom did the Supreme Court issue notice?
The bench of Justice Dipankar Dutta and AG Masih issued notice to the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha secretariat on the petition of Justice Verma. Justice Verma has challenged the Speaker’s decision on the grounds that proper procedure was not followed. In the cause list of the Supreme Court, the identity of the petitioner has been hidden and he has been shown only by the name of ‘X’.
What were Justice Verma’s arguments?
Justice Verma says that even though notices of his impeachment were given in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, the Speaker constituted the committee when the Rajya Sabha Chairman had not yet accepted the notice. Not only this, there was no joint consultation between the two houses. He argued that under the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968, the Speaker constituted the committee unilaterally on August 12, whereas the proposal was accepted in the Lok Sabha on July 21 and a separate proposal was made in the Rajya Sabha on the same day, which was not yet accepted.
Why can’t a committee be formed, Verma gave this argument?
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who appeared in the Supreme Court on behalf of Justice Verma, argued that if notices are given to both the Houses on the same day. As happened in this case, no committee can be formed until the proposal is accepted in both the houses. And when the proposal is accepted in both the Houses, the committee will be formed jointly by the Lok Sabha Speaker and the Rajya Sabha Chairman. The senior lawyer said that if the notices are given on the same day and until the proposal is formally accepted, the committee will be constituted jointly after consultation between the Speaker and the Chairman and it will be called a joint committee of both the Houses.
Justice Dutta asked that if two proposals are presented in both the Houses on the same day, then where does the question of acceptance on the same day arise? Justice Verma, who was working in the Delhi High Court, was transferred to the Allahabad High Court on March 14 after the burnt currency was found.
Let us tell you that on March 22, a week after the currency notes were found on March 14, the then Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna constituted a three-member panel, which included Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court GS Sandhwalay and Judge Anu Sivaraman of Karnataka High Court. This panel conducted an in-house investigation of the entire matter. The panel found the allegations against Justice Verma to be true. Even after the committee’s report, Justice Verma refused to resign, after which this report was sent to the President and Prime Minister.
