With former Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) P J Thomas planning to approach the Supreme Court for a review of its decision to quash his appointment as CVC, things are getting murkier (“Thomas to challenge Supreme Court order”, March 13). In his statement to Parliament, the Prime Minister said he had not been aware of the pending chargesheet against Thomas in the palmolein import case. Since Thomas had been appointed earlier as chief secretary in Kerala and secretary in the central government, the PM went ahead with Thomas’ appointment as CVC. A couple of points need to be clarified in this connection. First, though what the prime minister said is logical and acceptable, people would like to know why he did not defer the decision on the CVC’s appointment to enquire into the objections raised by Sushma Swaraj, as suggested by her. Second, the more fundamental question is about Thomas’ appointment as chief secretary in Kerala and secretary in two departments of the Centre. Was the adverse information in the service file suppressed on these occasions? If yes, who was responsible for this?
A Seshan, Mumbai
Readers should write to:
The Editor, Business Standard,
Nehru House,
4, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi 110 002,
Fax: (011) 23720201;
letters@bsmail.in
