Guv seeks Attorney General’s opinion on IC appointment  

VIJAY DEO JHA

RANCHI

As the appointment of Information Commissioners (IC) in Jharkhand caught in legal and political wrangle, Governor Syed Ahmed has sought the opinion of Attorney General of India G E Vahanvati on this matter.

“It is basically a constitutional appointment hence a decision was taken to seek opinion of Attorney General. It is also because of the fact that Supreme Court has given certain directives regarding appointment of Information Commissioners in the States of the country which central government has challenged on certain grounds. We are awaiting Attorney’s opinion,” Principle Secretary to Governor Aditya Swaroop said. This is third such opinion taking exercise — Governor twice obtained the opinion of State’s Advocate General (AG) Anil Kumar Sinha.

But the Supreme Court ruling given on 13 Sept 2012 in Namit Sharma Vs Union of India case and centre’s review petition therein; is not the sole issue forcing the Governor to seek Attorney’s opinion.

A PIL was filed by one Sri Krishna Pandey at Jharkhand High Court challenging the very process and criteria fixed for the appointments of ICs in Jharkhand. Pandey sought Apex Court’s intervention to direct Jharkhand government to start fresh process of appointment in the light of SC’s ruling.  

The ruling says appointments should be made through public advertisement as well as in accordance with the SC directives. It strictly forbids hush-hush to stop pick and chose appointments on political and personal basic. It said Chief Information Commissioner must be a retired justice of Supreme Court or an ex chief justice of High Court besides 50 per cent of members appointed must be legally qualified, judicially trained and experienced. Centre contended ‘Information Commission’ is a kind of social legislation. The SC ruling will make difficult to appoint people from different walk of life hence it will be a lopsided arrangement, Centre contended.

But in Jharkhand concerns leaps beyond constitutional limit where the very process of appointments and faces selected were dubbed as case of personal and political favouritism.

When the process of appointment was started in Jharkhand; a three men committee of Chief Minister Arjun Munda, Leader of Opposition Rajendra Singh and Land Revenue Minister Mathura Mahato finally picked three names: PR Das (former Registrar General of the Jharkhand High Court), Rajesh Srivastava and Himanshu Chaudhary.

The only qualification of Srivastava is that he is hotelier and budding building constructor. The idea that probably promoted Srivastava to vie for such important post is not a speculation job. Sources confided that Srivastava was a personal choice of Singh because he (Srivastava) happens to be business partner of Anup Singh who is Singh’s son and political heir apparent. Nevertheless, AG in his opinion given to Governor in the past is learnt to have found Srivastava poorly under qualified. Hence his name was reportedly dropped from the list. But Srivastava has not lost hope.

Chaudhary in his polished CV claims himself as an outstanding and veteran journalist with years of public exposure. But the state and people came to know about him — that to quite little — when he joined as political advisor of Chief Minister Shibu Soren in 2010. Political sources admitted Chaudhary is Soren’s choice.

Sources in the Raj Bhavan confided those factors which forced Governor to seek opinion of Attorney. “SC’s observation is off course an issue. But Governor being the appointing authority he will not like any controversy after much doubts and disputes raised over appointment process,” sources said. Retired justice DK Sinha; Chief Information Commissioner, is the only member left at of State Information Commission. He will have to wait for some times.