CEC and Centre differ on powers of CEC in SC

New Delhi, Aug 2 (UNI) The Chief Election Commissioner and the Centre today headed for a confrontation in the Supreme Court on the issue whether the CEC can recommend the removal of an Election Commissioner if representation is made to him directly.

The query was made by a bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhan and V S Sirpurkar during the hearing of the petition filed by former union minister and senior BJP leader Jaswant Singh for the removal of Election Commissioner Navin Chawla.

The court wanted to know whether CEC was competent to order dismissal of an Election Commissioner even when the representation has been made to him directly instead of being made to the President of India.

Counsel for CEC expressed the view ''the CEC believes that he has the power to recommend the removal of Election Commissioner suo motu.'' Additional Solicitor General(ASG) Gopal Subramaniam appearing for the Union Government, however, took a different stand and submitted before the court ''the government is of the view that the representation must be routed through the President of India and CEC can give his opinion on the future of an Election Commissioner only when the reference to him has been made by the President.'' The court directed the ASG to seek instruction from the government on the issue and if the CEC can order the removal of an Election Commissioner then the matter will be disposed off.

Mr Subramaniam, however, contended that it was a serious issue and the petition cannot be disposed off without hearing the parties at length and the procedure provided under Article 324(5) of the Constitution of India was to provide a safety valve against an assault on the independence of the Election Commission.

He also contended that the allegation made against Mr Chawla in the complaint signed by 205 NDA MPs related to the period when Mr Chawla was not the Election Commissioner and no allegation has been made in the representation against Mr Chawla after he was appointed as an Election Commisioner by the UPA government.

The court, however, responded by saying ''even the past track of a person is a relevant consideration while appointing him an Election Commissioner who is entrusted with the job of conducting free and fair election.'' The main allegation against Mr Chawla made by Mr Jaswant Singh and another MP Chandra Bhushan Singh are that Mr Chawla was very close to Congress leaders and his attitude towards the Congress was partisan, as Congress leaders had contributing from MPLAD scheme fund to the trust was run by the family members of Navin Chawla including his wife Rupika Chawla. He was also censured by Justice Shah Commission for emergency excesses.

The then President A P J Abdul Kalam instead of referring the representation to the CEC, referred it to the government which after seeking the opinion of the Attorney General Milon K Bannerjee did not think it fit to proceed further with the complaint.

The stand taken today by the CEC in the Supreme Court is at variance with the stand taken earlier by him in which he had contended that he could not do anything unless the representation was referred to him for his opinion by the President.

UNI