from SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL included below]
WHO IS CORRECT ; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OR A CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA? (SEE ATTACHMENTS)
Department of Justice in an RTI response has clearly mentioned about existence of a procedure to deal with complaints received by Chief Justices of Supreme Court and High Courts against judges of higher courts. But an earlier RTI response from Supreme Court mentioned the then Chief Justice of India YK Sabharwal saying directly in contrast as "Neither Supreme Court nor Chief Justice of India is the appointing or disciplinary authority in respect of judges of superior courts including judges of High Courts."
Otherwise also such a statement puts question-mark on authenticity of 'In House procedure' and 'Restatement of values of judicial life' as unanimously passed by all judges of the Supreme Court, where complaint before YK Sabharwal was against a High Court judge who took up and decided a matter in favour of a person who performed marriage of his grand-daughter from official residence of that judge. YK Sabharwal is also on record to say that the complaint had no merit even though point number seven of 'Restatement of Values of Judicial Life' reads as "A judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a member of his family, a close relation or a friend is concerned". Also it is a known fact that Chief Justice of India plays a major role in appointment of judges of higher courts.
Significantly YK Sabharwal has been a Chief Justice of India who was later not considered fit by Union government to be appointed as Chief of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). RTI response from Department of Justice also reveals that tainted judges having resigned or removed after initiation of impeachment-process get full post-retirement benefits apart from getting benefit of all complaint-cases against them closed forever! Since Indian system is practically blind on crushing of human-rights of judicial victims, it is for United Nations Human Rights Commission to make Indian government provide an effective system to save human rights of judicial victims also by compensating them from the erring judges.
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL
(Guinness Record Holder & RTI Activist)
1775 Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
DELHI 110006 (India)
Mobile 9810033711 Fax 23254036
E-mail subhashmadhu@sify.com
Web www.subhashmadhu.com
WHO IS CORRECT ; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OR A CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA? (SEE ATTACHMENTS)
Department of Justice in an RTI response has clearly mentioned about existence of a procedure to deal with complaints received by Chief Justices of Supreme Court and High Courts against judges of higher courts. But an earlier RTI response from Supreme Court mentioned the then Chief Justice of India YK Sabharwal saying directly in contrast as "Neither Supreme Court nor Chief Justice of India is the appointing or disciplinary authority in respect of judges of superior courts including judges of High Courts."
Otherwise also such a statement puts question-mark on authenticity of 'In House procedure' and 'Restatement of values of judicial life' as unanimously passed by all judges of the Supreme Court, where complaint before YK Sabharwal was against a High Court judge who took up and decided a matter in favour of a person who performed marriage of his grand-daughter from official residence of that judge. YK Sabharwal is also on record to say that the complaint had no merit even though point number seven of 'Restatement of Values of Judicial Life' reads as "A judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a member of his family, a close relation or a friend is concerned". Also it is a known fact that Chief Justice of India plays a major role in appointment of judges of higher courts.
Significantly YK Sabharwal has been a Chief Justice of India who was later not considered fit by Union government to be appointed as Chief of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). RTI response from Department of Justice also reveals that tainted judges having resigned or removed after initiation of impeachment-process get full post-retirement benefits apart from getting benefit of all complaint-cases against them closed forever! Since Indian system is practically blind on crushing of human-rights of judicial victims, it is for United Nations Human Rights Commission to make Indian government provide an effective system to save human rights of judicial victims also by compensating them from the erring judges.
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL
(Guinness Record Holder & RTI Activist)
1775 Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
DELHI 110006 (India)
Mobile 9810033711 Fax 23254036
E-mail subhashmadhu@sify.com
Web www.subhashmadhu.com
Attachment(s) from SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL
4 of 4 File(s)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment