Why shouldn’t CBI probe tribunal members: HC to govt
Ahmedabad:The Gujarat high court (HC) on Monday asked the goverment pleader to apprise the court why a CBI inquiry should not be instituted against two members of the Gujarat Co-operative Tribunal to probe allegations of acts of impropriety by them when they were with the government office. The two administrative members of the tribunal are retired additional registrars, who came to be appointed members of the tribunal in October last year. The Bar of the tribunal moved a PIL for removal of these two members, as they are not judicial officers and the Bar also claimed that they were facing charges of acts of omission and commission during their duty as additional registrars.
For last two decades, the tribunal’s bar has been insisting that judicial officers be appointed as members and chairman of the tribunal and not administrative officers of the state government. The dispute was resolved last year after the state government said before the high court that they would appoint law officers.
However, two administrative officers were appointed after consultation with the advocate general, which is the procedure as per Rule 78 of Gujarat Co-operative Society Rules. The Bar moved a PIL against this, and the duo filed an affidavit in this regard. The state legal department then asked government pleader Prakash Jani to represent the two members.
When the judges found that the state government was representing the two, they asked how the government could spend money on a private litigant. The court sought an explanation and asked the government pleader to communicate to the two to clarify why the high court should not set up a CBI probe in connection with the Bar’s allegations of corruption. This case is kept for further hearing on April 7.
Ahmedabad:The Gujarat high court (HC) on Monday asked the goverment pleader to apprise the court why a CBI inquiry should not be instituted against two members of the Gujarat Co-operative Tribunal to probe allegations of acts of impropriety by them when they were with the government office. The two administrative members of the tribunal are retired additional registrars, who came to be appointed members of the tribunal in October last year. The Bar of the tribunal moved a PIL for removal of these two members, as they are not judicial officers and the Bar also claimed that they were facing charges of acts of omission and commission during their duty as additional registrars.
For last two decades, the tribunal’s bar has been insisting that judicial officers be appointed as members and chairman of the tribunal and not administrative officers of the state government. The dispute was resolved last year after the state government said before the high court that they would appoint law officers.
However, two administrative officers were appointed after consultation with the advocate general, which is the procedure as per Rule 78 of Gujarat Co-operative Society Rules. The Bar moved a PIL against this, and the duo filed an affidavit in this regard. The state legal department then asked government pleader Prakash Jani to represent the two members.
When the judges found that the state government was representing the two, they asked how the government could spend money on a private litigant. The court sought an explanation and asked the government pleader to communicate to the two to clarify why the high court should not set up a CBI probe in connection with the Bar’s allegations of corruption. This case is kept for further hearing on April 7.
No comments:
Post a Comment