The Supreme Court today reserved its judgement in a petition challenging the appointment of Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) KV Chowdary and Vigilance Commissioner (VC) TM Bhasin..The matter came up for hearing before the Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Mohan M Shantanagoudar..The petition filed by NGO Common Cause contends that the appointment of the CVC and the VC was arbitrary and violative of the principle of institutional integrity. Appearing for the NGO, Prashant Bhushan alleged that Chowdary had influenced an investigation against the infamous businessman Ponty Chaddha..Bhushan, along with Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani and BJP MP Subramanian Swamy, had opposed the appointment of Chowdary as CVC back in 2015..The Bench, while hearing the petition today, questioned the Centre’s mode of appointing the CVC and the VC. The Centre was asked why only retired bureaucrats were being appointed and why the people with impeccable integrity were not being appointed. The Court also observed that discrepancies must be removed from the selection procedure..The Bench then proceeded to reserve its judgment in the case.
The Supreme Court today reserved its judgement in a petition challenging the appointment of Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) KV Chowdary and Vigilance Commissioner (VC) TM Bhasin..The matter came up for hearing before the Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Mohan M Shantanagoudar..The petition filed by NGO Common Cause contends that the appointment of the CVC and the VC was arbitrary and violative of the principle of institutional integrity. Appearing for the NGO, Prashant Bhushan alleged that Chowdary had influenced an investigation against the infamous businessman Ponty Chaddha..Bhushan, along with Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani and BJP MP Subramanian Swamy, had opposed the appointment of Chowdary as CVC back in 2015..The Bench, while hearing the petition today, questioned the Centre’s mode of appointing the CVC and the VC. The Centre was asked why only retired bureaucrats were being appointed and why the people with impeccable integrity were not being appointed. The Court also observed that discrepancies must be removed from the selection procedure..The Bench then proceeded to reserve its judgment in the case.
