The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Centre to place before it files relating to the appointment of Arun Goel as election commissioner to ensure there was no “hanky panky” in the process.
Goel, an IAS officer who took voluntary retirement last Friday, was appointed to the constitutional post on Saturday and assumed charge on Monday.
A five-judge constitution bench, headed by Justice K.M. Joseph, appeared annoyed that the decision to appoint Goel was taken at a time the bench was hearing a batch of petitions seeking an independent mechanism to appoint election commissioners and the chief election commissioner.
The appointment also comes in the middle of the election process in Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh and ahead of elections in Uttar Pradesh, Meghalaya and Nagaland next year.
The bench brushed aside objections from attorney-general R. Venkataramani that the court could not examine such administrative decisions.
“I take serious objections to this and have my reservation to the court seeking the files in the midst of hearing of the constitution bench,” Venkataramani told the bench, which included Justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and C.T. Ravikumar. Overruling the objection, the bench asked Venkataramani to produce the files by Thursday.
At present, the chief election commissioner and election commissioners are appointed by the Centre, leading to allegations that the appointments are political. The petitions seek an independent mechanism, including a say in the appointment for the Chief Justice of India. “If you are in the right (side), as you claim that there is no hanky-panky, then there is nothing to fear,” the bench told Venkataramani.
“We are not sitting in judgment over the appointment. But we would like to know what is the position. This will be an eye-opener. There is no danger. If everything is hunky-dory, everything was going on smoothly as you say, you have nothing to fear,” Justice Joseph said.
The bench made the observation after Prashant Bhushan, appearing for one of the petitioners, complained that Goel had taken voluntary retirement last week and assumed charge as election commissioner by Monday.
Bhushan pointed out that retired officials were usually appointed as election commissioners. “All these years… whoever has been appointed as ECs are retired persons, but he (Goel) was a sitting secretary in the government. On Thursday, this court heard the arguments, and on Friday he was given voluntary retirement. His appointment order was issued on Saturday or Sunday, but he has already started working as EC from Monday,” Bhushan said.
Justice Joseph agreed with Bhushan’s submission and said a three-month notice had to be given by an employee seeking VRS from the government.
“Mr Attorney-General, what is the mechanism by which this officer was picked? Can it be made when the matter was being considered by this court, when there is an application against the appointment? How did this one get through?” the bench asked Venkataramani.
Goel’s last assignment was as secretary in the heavy industries ministry. Justice Joseph asked the AG to produce the file on Thursday, saying: “We don’t think it is a matter where you should be withholding information. We are living in a democracy.”
