HC, Raj Bhawan at loggerheads

Lucknow, June 21 : After exactly a decade, the Allahabad High Court and Raj Bhawan are at loggerheads once again -- and interestingly on the same issue.

While the High Court is adamant on removing additional legal advisor to Raj Bhawan, Pradeep Dubey, the latter has so far refused to oblige the judiciary.

In 1996, the then legal advisor to the Raj Bhawan, Chandra Bhushan Pandey, had to resign following a similar controversy.

The High Court had placed Governor TV Rajeswar's additional legal advisor under suspension on June 7 for non-compliance of its order transferring him as additional district judge. The Court had also ordered an enquiry against Dubey with corruption charges against him.

But the Governor insisted that he is the final authority and has refused to recognise the suspension order of the High Court. Dubey, as a result, continues to be the legal advisor at the Raj Bhawan.

Taking the matter further, the High Court has stuck to its point and has now ordered a probe against Dubey. Further action may be taken against him once the inquiry report was submitted to the court, said a judicial officer.

A sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court has been appointed as the inquiry officer for the probe against Dubey and the inquiry may be completed by next month. The State Government has already washed its hands off the issue to save its skin and has relieved Dubey in compliance of the HC order.

Dubey, however, refused to comment on the controversy while no one from Raj Bhawan was available for reaction.

Meanwhile, former legal advisor to the Raj Bhawan, Chandra Bhushan Pandey told UNI that as Governor was the appointing authority of the advisor, HC should restrain itself from entering into the controversy.

Mr Pandey claimed, he had to resign in a similar situation. ''How can Dubey ignore the wishes of the Governor who wants him to stay,'' Pandey, now a legal practitioner in the HC, quipped.

Pandey had to resign when the High Court ordered his transfer from the post and then Governor Moti Lal Vohra refused to relieve him. He was suspended by the Court on July 1,1996 but later he resigned on July 7, 1996 thus ending the imbroglio.

He said the law should be amended to avoid such controversies in future. According to sources the Governor is in no mood to relieve the legal advisor and had conveyed his wishes to the Court. The Raj Bhawan had initially indicated that they wanted to retain Dubey till Assembly elections in the state. However, the HC insisted the normal tenure of any officer in Raj Bhawan should not exceed five years. As Dubey had already crossed the five-year limit, his continuation at the Raj Bhawan was against the existing policies.

Significantly, the Governor has made it clear that even if he agrees to oppoint another judicial officer as his legal advisor, he would relieve Dubey only after ''observing'' the performance of the new appointee for three months. The Raj Bhawan, therefore, has requested the High Court to send names of officers.

High Court Registrar General Swatantra Singh said the High Court had invited applications from the judicial officers to replace Dubey. In all 39 applications were received and the HC selected Vinay Verma. Verma's name was forwarded to the Raj Bhawan. But the Raj Bhawan denied to consider him and asked for a panel of officers rather than a single name.

High Court in its letter to the Raj Bhawan quoted provisions of Article 235 of the Constitution to get across the view that it had supreme control over the judicial officers. But Raj Bhawan had relied on Article 233 as a counter, which provides that the High Court should be consulted by the Governor in the matters of appointing, posting and promoting district judges.

Raj Bhawan feels that the High Court had only recommendatory powers in Dubey's case. A Government Order of 1985 providing for Governor's consent for transferring officers was also proving handy to the Raj Bhawan.

UNI