Government today placed the file relating to the appointment of PJ Thomas as the chief vigilance commissioner in the Supreme Court, which questioned as to how he would function in the post in view of a pending criminal case against him.
After putting the prime minister’s office in an embarrassing position over the 2G spectrum scam, the Supreme Court has delivered another blow to the Union government on the issue of corruption by questioning the appointment of PJ Thomas as the head of watchdog agency Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). Thomas is facing charges in the palm oil scam case in Kerala. He was also the secretary to the department of telecommunications (DoT) when the spectrum allocation scam took place.
Hearing a petition challenging the appointment to the high-profile position that also supervises the CBI and other investigating agencies, the court asked attorney general (AG) Goolam E Vahanvati whether impeccable integrity wasn’t the criteria for making the choice. The AG said if that is the sole criteria, then certain senior posts, including in the judiciary, would become suspect.
He also defended Thomas, saying he had implemented a scheme following a cabinet decision. There is a stay in the court proceedings.
Moreover, no sanction has been granted by the state government to prosecute its former agriculture secretary. The petition was filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL).
It’s lawyer Prashant Bhushan said the Union government ignored the dissent of the leader of the opposition Sushma Swaraj while appointing Thomas. He said, being the CVC now, he faces a conflict of interest situation.
Anguished at the manner of appointment of Thomas, a bench of chief justice SH Kapadia and justices KS Radhakrishnan and Swantanter Kumar asked the government to file within two weeks the material concerning Thomas’s appointment.
But the judges wondered how a CVC could function when his own name figures in the charge sheet. “Tell us how he will functions as CVC with such allegations against him. In every matter he will face embarrassment,” the court said.
The court pointed out that under the service jurisprudence, a person cannot even be considered for promotions when a chargesheet is pending against him. The court also inquired from the AG whether impeccable integrity could be treated as an eligibility criterion for appointment for the post of CVC. And whether this criterion of the outstanding civil servant has been followed or not in the present case.
“This is the touchstone on which the entire matter depends,” the court added.
The CJI said the court is concerned that if a person is an accused in a criminal case how will he function as CVC.
The mode of selection of the CVC was fixed by the Supreme Court. One of the criteria is impeccable integrity. The appointment must be after proper consultation between the prime minister, home minister and the leader of the opposition. Bhushan said not only did the government appoint Thomas in defiance of the consultation principle but also ignored the fact he was the secretary of DoT when the 2G scam took place.
For any investigation in the scam, CBI and other investigating agencies would have to seek his nod, he added.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}