The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a plea seeking timely and transparent filling of long pending vacancies in the Central Vigilance Commission so as to ensure that the Commission can effectively discharge its duties as an 'integrity institution'.
A bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka was considering a petition filed by NGO Common Cause through Advocate Prashant Bhushan.
The petitioner pointed out in its petition that only one commissioner is discharging the functions of the entire Commission since 24th June 2021. The petition informed the court that according to the Central Vigilance Commission Act 2003, CVC shall be constituted in accordance with Section 3 of the Act and shall consist of a Central Vigilance Commissioner as Chairperson and not more than two Vigilance Commissioners as Members.
The petition stated that vacancies arose in October of 2020 for the post of Vigilance Commissioner and in June of 2021 for the post of Central Vigilance Commissioner, however no appointments were made pursuant to those vacancies. On 24th June 2021 exercising power under Section 10(1) of the act of 2003, S. Suresh N. Patel, the lone remaining Vigilance Commissioner was authorized to act as the Central Vigilance Commissioner until the appointment of the Central Vigilance Commissioner.
The petition pointed out that the Commission was set up in 1964 by a Government Resolution and continued to function as such till the judgment of Vineet Narain vs Union of India was delivered by the Supreme Court in which it was ordered that the Central Vigilance Commission was to be given a statutory status and after which by the 1999 Ordinance the Commission became a multi member commission headed by Central Vigilance Commissioner.
The petitioner in the petition pointed out the order of the Supreme Court of adopting a fair and transparent process, delivered in the matter of Centre for Public Interest Litigation vs Union of India, has been vitiated by the Selection Committee and on filing an RTI the Respondents had outrightly refused to give out any information regarding the appointment process except for giving the copy of the advertisement and informing that the selection process is underway.
The petition claims that the non appointment of Commissioners for extended periods of time and thereafter frustration of the right to information of the citizens is in violation of the Article 14, 19 and 21 guaranteed to the citizens by the Constitution of India. The petitioner thus prayed to direct the Respondents to take urgent steps to appoint Vigilance Commissioner and Central Vigilance Commissioner in pursuance of the advertisements issued in 2020 and 2021 and in accordance with the directions issued in Centre for Public Interest Litigation vs Union of India.
The petitioner also prayed that the Respondents should be directed to place all the documents related to the selection process/appointments to the Central Vigilance Commission in public domain in accordance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the matter of Anjali Bharadwaj & Ors. vs Union of India & Ors in relation to the appointment of Central Information Commissioners.
Case Title : Common Cause vs Union of India W.P.(C) No. 1244/2021
