A five-judge Constitution Bench led by Justice A.K. Sikri will on Tuesday hear a writ petition filed by Rajya Sabha members calling Vice-President Venkaiah Naidu’s refusal to admit the motion for removal of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on the grounds of abuse of power and forgery an “eyewash.”
The Bench is also composed of Justices S.A. Bobde, N.V. Ramana, Arun Mishra and Adarsh Kumar Goel. The four senior most judges — Justices Jasti Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B. Lokur and Kurian Joseph — are not part of the Constitution Bench. Justice Sikri is judge number six in the Supreme Court. The Bench is decided by the CJI in his administrative capacity as master of the roster.
The four senior most SC judges may not have been included on the Bench because one of the charges in the motion is the CJI’s ‘abuse of authority’ as master of roster. The four judges had voiced their concern publicly about this issue in their Jan. 12 press meet.
The petition was mentioned on Monday morning before a Bench of Justices J. Chelameswar and S.K. Kaul by senior advocate Kapil Sibal for early hearing. The petition was mentioned before the Chelameswar Bench as the removal motion was against CJI Misra, who was presiding over the Bench in the court next door at the time. Recent rules say mentioning can be done before the Judicial Registrar alone. Besides, a senior advocate cannot do it.
The Bench appeared non-committal, saying it would “discuss” the issue and had asked the lawyers to “come back tomorrow.”
The MPs, Partap Singh Bajwa and Dr. Amee Harshadray Yajnik, signatories to the removal motion, said it was “strange” that Mr. Naidu deemed it fit to consult legal luminaries and constitutional experts but did not think it “appropriate and fit to consult the judges of the Supreme Court of India.” The MPs called this alone a “serious infirmity” in the decision.
The MPs, represented by advocate Sunil Fernandes, on Monday alleged that the Rajya Sabha Chairman acted in a “cavalier” manner by refusing to admit the notice of motion signed by over 50 MPs.
Meanwhile, another Bench led by Justice A.K. Sikri adjourned a petition for contempt against Congress MPs for defaming the CJI and the Supreme Court by discussing their removal motion in public before the Chairman took a decision. The court has scheduled the case for hearing in July.
The petition said Mr. Naidu acted like a quasi-judicial authority, assuming the mantle of the inquiry committee and dismissing the motion on merits.
The two MPs alleged that Mr. Naidu acted in a manner “ex facie illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14.”
“The impugned order is in the teeth of the constitutional mandate of Article 124(4) and 124(5) and the provisions of the Judges Inquiry Act. None of the reasons given by the Chairman in the order carry any weight or are legally tenable. It deserves to be set aside for being wholly extraneous and ultra vires to the provisions of the Constitution of India and the Inquiry Act,” the petition said.
