Cji misra impeachment bjp backs naidu's 'well reasoned' order

CJI Misra impeachmentBJP backs Naidu's 'wellreasoned' order Rajya Sabha MPs Partap Singh Bajwa and Amee Harshadray Yajnik filed a petition against Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu's decision to reject the Opposition's impeachment motion against CJI Dipak Misra

Congress Rajya Sabha Parliamentarians Pratap Singh Bajwa and Amee Harshadray Yajnik on Monday approached the Supreme Court challenging Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu's decision to dismiss the Opposition's impeachment motion against Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra. In their prayer before the apex court, they sought a quashing of Naidu's order, directing an enquiry into the matter under the Judges Inquiry Act, and forming a committee for the investigation. Reacting to the move, the BJP said Naidu's decision was well-reasoned.In their petition, the two Congress leaders claimed that once the initiation of removal motion was signed by the requisite number of MPs, the Vice-President had no option but to constitute an inquiry committee for investigating the allegations levelled against the CJI.Naidu had on April 23 rejected the notice by seven Opposition parties, led by the Congress, to impeach the chief justice of India on five grounds of "misbehaviour", saying the allegations were neither "tenable nor admissible". The Congress had slammed his order as "hasty, illegal and illinformed".

Here are the latest updates on Congress MPs moving the Supreme Court challenging Vice-President M Venkaiah Naidu's decision to reject the impeachment motion against CJI Misra: 1) BJP's Aman Sinha says Naidu's rejection of impeachment notice well-reasoned: BJP leader and advocate Aman Sinha on Monday said there was no legal ground to challenge the decision of the Rajya Sabha chairman rejecting the impeachment notice against Chief Justice Misra. Reacting to the two Congress MPs moving the Supreme Court on Monday to challenge the rejection of the impeachment notice, Sinha said the decision was a well-reasoned and speaking order which completely dealt with each and every ground mentioned in the impeachment notice.

2) Opposition leaders on Monday moved the apex court against the rejection of the impeachment notice against CJI Misra by Rajya Sabha Chairman Naidu.

3) Senior advocate Kapil Sibal mentioned the matter for urgent listing before Justice Jasti Chelameswar.

4) Justice Chelameswar said there was a Constitution Bench verdict on master of roster and that the petition should be mentioned before CJI Misra. The Bench, also comprising Justice S K Kaul, asked Sibal and advocate Prashant Bhushan to mention the matter before the Chief Justice of India for urgent listing, citing a Constitution Bench judgment on powers of master of roster.

5) Sibal responded that the impeachment notice was against the CJI, hence the seniormost judge can direct for listing of the petition. "I am aware of the procedure but it can't be mentioned anywhere else. A person cannot be a judge in his own cause. I am just asking for urgent listing and not seeking any interim relief," Sibal said.

6) Sibal said that this type of a situation had not arisen before and the court should pass an order on who would deal with the matter and how it would be dealt with. When Justice Kaul asked Sibal who had drafted the petition, whether the plea had been numbered, Sibal replied that they had filed a petition in the Registry but were not willing to number it.

7) Both Justice Chelameswar and Justice Kaul went into a huddle and asked Sibal and Bhushan to come on Tuesday so that they could take a call on the issue.

8) In their petition, they have requested the court to issue an "appropriate writ, order or direction of like nature, quashing the order dated 23.04.2018," passed by Rajya Sabha Chairman Naidu rejecting the impeachment notice against CJI Misra "as arbitrary, impermissible under Section 3(1) of the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India".

9) They have prayed that the SC issue "an appropriate writ, order or direction of like nature declaring Section 3(1) of the Judges Inquiry Act 1968, insofar it enables the Chairman/Speaker to exercise his discretion with regard to adjudication of the merits of

the charges/allegations contained in the Notice of Motion for removal, as done in the instant impugned order dated 23.04.2018, as ultra vires to the Constitution of India, especially to Article 124(4)&(5)".

10) They have also requested the apex court to "issue an appropriate writ, order or direction or like nature declaring that the Chairman Rajya Sabha is duty-bound in law, to expeditiously refer the Charges/Allegations contained in the Notice of Motion of Removal, to the Inquiry Committee as envisaged under Judges Inquiry Act 1968, without any delay or demur, solely upon satisfaction that the said Motion is indeed signed by 50 members of the Rajya Sabha."

11) The petition has also requested that the SC issue an "appropriate writ, order or direction or like nature, directing the Chairman, Rajya Sabha to admit the Notice of Motion for presenting an Address to the Hon’ble President for removal of Hon’ble Chief Justice of India Shri Dipak Misra".

12) Further, they wish that the SC issue an "appropriate writ, order or direction or like nature directing the Chairman, Rajya Sabha, to constitute a Committee in terms of Section 3(2), for the purpose of making an investigation into the grounds on which the removal of Hon’ble Chief Justice of India Shri Dipak Misra is prayed for".

13) The petition ends by praying in front of the SC that it "pass such other order(s) or direction(s) as it deems fit in the facts of the present case and in the interests of justice".

ARTICLE SOURCE- BUSINESS STANDARD.