CJ, SC judges in 20-minute huddle post Naidu’s rejection of notice to remove Misra

CJ, SC judges in 20-minute huddle post Naidu’s rejection of notice to remove Misra

New Delhi: Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra and judges of the Supreme Court (SC) this morning had a 20-minute-long meeting following the announcement that Rajya Sabha chairman Venkaiah Naidu rejected a motion to remove Misra.
Though a morning meeting of the CJI with SC judges is a regular affair, what isn’t regular is for the meeting to be as long as today’s one was. The usual meeting lasts no longer than five minutes. It was only after the 20-minute meeting,that all the benches started functioning today – 15 minutes later than usual.
Earlier today, Naidu rejected the Congress-led opposition parties’ notice to remove the CJI saying it lacked substantial merit.
“Having considered the material contained in the notice of motion and reflected upon the inputs received in my interaction with legal luminaries and constitutional experts, I am of the firm opinion that the notice of the motion does not deserve to be admitted. Accordingly I refuse to admit notice of motion,” said Naidu.
On Friday, as many as 64 Parliamentarians (MPs) belonging to seven political parties signed the notice for removal proceedings against the CJI. They include MPs from the Congress, the NCP, CPM, the CPI, the SP, the BSP and the Muslim League.
Senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal said on Friday the notice mentions five grounds of misbehaviour for the CJI’s removal.
The grounds are:
1.”Conspiracy to pay illegal gratification” in the Prasad Education Trust case and the denial of permission to proceed against a retired high court judge in the same matter.
2. The CJI allegedly listed the petition against the Prasad Education Trust before himself, even when he was heading the Constitution bench, which is against the convention.
3. “Antedating” (backdating) of an order for listing of a petition related to the investigation against the Prasad Education Trust in the Supreme Court.
4. Misra allegedly acquired a piece of land by giving a “false affidavit” while he was an advocate. The plot was surrendered in 2012 when he was elevated to the Supreme Court, even though orders cancelling the allotment were given in 1985. 5. Abuse of exercise of power by the Chief Justice in choosing to send sensitive matters to particular benches by misusing his authority as Master of the Roster with the likely intent to influence the outcome.
5. Abuse of exercise of power by the Chief Justice in choosing to send sensitive matters to particular benches by misusing his authority as Master of the Roster with the likely intent to influence the outcome.