COMMON CAUSE & Anr. v. UNION OF INDIA & Anr.

Judgment

3 S.C.R. 1067 1067 COMMON CAUSE & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. (Writ Petition (C) No. 54 of 2019) FEBRUARY 19, 2019 [ARUN MISHRA AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ.] Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946: s. 4A – Appointment of interim Director of CBI – Challenged in petition u/Art. 32 of the Constitution – Seeking quashing of the order appointing interim Director and also seeking direction to appoint a regular Director of CBI – Plea taken that the appointment of interim Director was not as per s.4A and was arbitrary and illegal – Held: It is apparent from the resolution passed by the High Powered Selection Committee constituted u/s. 4A that appointment of the interim Director was authorised by the Committee – Therefore, the appointment was not unauthorised or illegal – The petition was filed in undue haste without verifying the fact as to whether the appointment was authorised – Since the regular Director has been appointed, the main prayer of the writ also stands satisfied. Dismissing the Writ petition, the Court HELD: It is clear from the resolution passed by the High Powered Selection Committee on 9/10th January, 2019 that the appointment of interim Director had been authorised by the Committee under section 4A of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. Thus, the plea that the Committee has not authorised the appointment of interim Director is totally misconceived and petitioners have failed to verify the aforesaid facts and the petition has been filed in undue haste without verifying the fact whether the appointment has been authorised by the Committee for appointment of Director constituted under section 4A of the Act. [Paras 14 and 16][1074-G; 1075-C]

#2. Petitioner had also prayed for disclosure as to what was the process being adopted by the Government to shortlist the candidates. In reply to the application, Petitioner No.2 was advised 1067 A B C D E F G H 1068 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 3 S.C.R. A B C D E F G H to take recourse to appeal before the appellate authority under the RTI Act. It appears that the petitioner has not filed any appeal/ s. Therefore, there is no ground to interfere in the matter on the said ground too. [Paras 18 and 19][1076-B; F]

#3. Since the regular Director has been appointed, the main prayer of the petitioner stands satisfied and there is absolutely no justification to continue with this writ petition in the aforesaid circumstances. [Para 20][1076-G]