Process to remove Justice Varma set in motion with MPs’ notices

Members of Parliament in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on Monday presented notices of motion to the presiding officers of the respective houses to remove Justice Yashwant Varma, embroiled in the cash-at-judge’s house case.

While 145 MPs, cutting across party lines, presented the motion to LS Speaker Om Birla, 63 MPs did so in the RS.

Rajya Sabha chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar, hours before resigning, also mentioned the motion in the House.

In the LS, MPs, including Rahul Gandhi and KC Venugopal of the Congress; Ravi Shankar Prasad and Anurag Thakur of the BJP; TR Baalu of the DMK and Supriya Sule of the NCP (SP) signed the notice among others.

In the RS, barring members of the TMC and the Samajwadi Party, who, opposition sources said, were not present today, 63 parliamentarians of various parties signed the motion.

With the receipt of these motions, the process laid down under The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, for the removal of judges was set in motion.

As per the law, a three-member committee has to be constituted once the motions for the removal of a judge are received.

But the houses have to admit the motions for such a panel to be formed.

In case where notices have come to both houses, a panel is jointly formed by the RS Chairman and the LS speaker once the motions are admitted. These admissions are likely tomorrow.

The probe committee will consist of three members — the Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court judge; chief justice of a high court and an eminent jurist.

Sources said in case the motions come to both houses, the senior presiding officer takes charge and accordingly that House witnesses the removal proceedings.

Till Dhankhar was in office as Vice-President, he being senior to Speaker Om Birla, the removal proceedings would have commenced in the RS. But with Dhankhar’s resignation as the VP this evening, that may change.

In the RS earlier today, Dhankhar said he had received a notice of motion under Article 217, 1B, read with Article 218 and Article 124, Sub Article 4 of the Constitution, along with Section 3.1.b of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, to constitute a statutory committee for the removal of Justice Yashwant Varma, a judge of the High Court of Judicature at Rajasthan, at Allahabad.

He said he had asked the RS secretary general to find out if a similar motion had been moved in the LS.

“This is being done for the purpose that under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, the procedure is different, if a motion is presented in one House or if the motion is presented on the same day in both houses,” he noted. If the motion is presented in the two houses on different dates, then the motion which is presented in the House first alone is taken into consideration and the second motion gets non-jurisdictional.

But if the motion is presented in both houses the same day, the provisions are different.

If the motion is presented only in one House, then the presiding officer of that House has the competence to consider the motion and either admit or reject it. But if a motion is presented on the same day in both houses, the right of the Speaker or the Chairman to admit or reject the motion is not there.

The law says if motions are presented in both houses the same day, “no committee shall be constituted unless the motion has been admitted in both houses and the committee shall be constituted jointly by the Speaker and the Chairman.”

India