The Supreme Court today raised serious questions over how P J Thomas could be appointed as Central Vigilance Commissioneer (CVC) and continue in the post despite a corruption case pending against him.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia also wryly observed that Thomas as the Central Vigilance Commissioner will himself feel embarrassed due to the pending criminal case against him as in every case the CBI will be dealing with him.
"Without looking into the file, we are concerned that if a person is an accused in a criminal case how will he function as CVC," it observed after Attorney General G E Vahanvati placed records of documents pertaining to Thomas's appointment in a sealed cover.
The Bench said it will go through the file and posted the matter after two weeks.
"We will sit together and go through the file," the Bench also comprising Justices K S Radhakrishnan and Swatanter Kumar said.
The name of Thomas, who was the Union Telecom secretary before being appointed as CVC on September 7 this year, figures in the chargesheet filed in Kerala in a palmolein import case.
More From This Section
After the file was placed before it, the apex court Bench queried whether the eligibility criteria of having impeccable integrity has been met by Thomas before he was appointed as CVC.
The Bench told Vahanvati that the issue as to how Thomas will function as CVC when his name is there in a chargesheet will crop up at every stage.
The AG sought to clarify that there was no involvement of Thomas in the palmolein import case and the sanction to prosecute him had not been processed.
"Let us proceed on assumption that at every stage there will be allegations that you should not process a file as Central Vigilance Commissioner as you are accused in a criminal case. How will you function as CVC?" the Bench said, adding "In every case the CBI has to report to him."
"Under the service jurisprudence, a person cannot even be considered for promotions when a chargesheet is pending against him," said the Bench.
"At this stage as a chargesheet is pending against him since 2002, he is not even considered to be promoted. We are only suggesting whether he will be able to function as CVC. He himself will be an embarrassment," it said.
"Since this matter is very important, we will structure our order on this basis," it said.
The Bench clarified that it was not on the merits of the palmolein import case but it only wanted to know if the whole procedure including the criteria of impeccable integrity was followed in the appointment of Thomas as CVC.
Vahanvati maintained that whole process was followed and told the court that if the kind of allegations against Thomas are taken into consideration, every judicial appointment may come into scrutiny.