Centre will take a call on Dinakaran after SC probe

The Centre will take a final call on the future of PD Dinakaran after it receives the findings of an inquiry ordered by Supreme Court chief justice KG Balakrishnan into the allegations that the Karnataka chief justice amassed property disproportionate to his known sources of income.

Dinakaran has denied the allegations and rubbished the prima facie evidence against him in the collector’s report. He is the first judge to face the disgrace of having his name dropped from a list of five judges selected by the SC collegium for elevation to the
top court.

As speculation was rife over Dinakaran’s continuation as a judge in view of the seriousness of the case, law minister M Veerappa Moily said on Monday,  “A constitutional authority can only pay heed to evidence and not perceptions.’’

Thus, any action against Dinakaran would be based on the findings of the probe that the SC collegium has ordered. “Though the government does not underestimate the allegations, but it’s bound by a set procedure,” Moily told DNA.

“We will proceed further after the inquiry. When a CJ stoutly denies the collector’s report, we have to resort to some independent probe,” CJI Balakrishnan said. “The collegium has set in motion the process to find out the truth behind the allegations. It has initiated an inquiry by independent channels. The probe will take into account the collector’s report and Dinakaran’s version,” he said.

Sources said it would be difficult to predict when the inquiry will be completed.
Meanwhile, the government has received the recommendations for elevation of four high court chief justices to the top court. Early in September, the collegium — that functions in complete secrecy —recommended five judges, including Dinakaran. But it had to withdraw his name thus clearing the deck for the other four CJs.

President Pratibha Patil may soon sign the warrants of appointment of AK Patnaik (Madhya Pradesh), Tirath Singh Thakur (Punjab and Haryana), SS Nijjar (Calcutta) and KS Radhakrishnan (Gujarat).

Since there will be three more vacancies to be filled, the government may persuade the collegium to consider elevating a meritorious woman judge to the apex court. “Merit is of paramount importance in the selection,’’ Moily said.

But the government isn’t satisfied with the outcome of Supreme Court’s nine-judge bench in 1993 (Second Judges Case) that created the office of collegium. It binds the government to accept whatever name the collegium recommends for the Supreme Court. It can’t reject CJI’s nomination/s.

“If the non-appointment in a rare case... [of a recommended appointee] turns out to be a mistake, that mistake in the ultimate public interest is less harmful than a wrong appointment,’’ the Supreme Court’s nine-judge bench had said. But the massive outcry over its wrong choice has saved the apex court from losing its credibility.