<p>The CBI today sought two-weeks time to file its affidavit in reply to a plea questioning the Maharashtra Governor's order refusing sanction to prosecute former Chief Minister Ashok Chavan in the Adarsh scam.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The application relied on a Supreme Court order and said that the CBI does not require sanction from the governor to prosecute public servants in cases which are being monitored by the judiciary.<br /><br />A division bench of justices P V Hardas and Ajey Gadkari adjourned the plea for two weeks after CBI sought time to file its affidavit.<br /><br />"The Supreme Court ruled that there is no requirement of sanction for the CBI under section 6-A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act to prosecute government servants in cases that are being monitored by the judiciary," the application, filed by former journalist Ketan Tirodkar, said.<br /><br />It further said that the CBI's compilation of documents submitted to the Governor for sanction to prosecute Chavan were foolproof and point out to the "faulty" decision of grant of additional FSI to the society allegedly by Chavan.<br /><br />"In return, Chavan's mother-in-law and brother of his father-in-law were alloted flats in the society," the application claimed.<br /><br />Tirodkar filed the application after Maharashtra Governor K Sankaranarayanan refused permission to CBI to prosecute Chavan.<br /><br />Chavan was accused of approving additional FSI (floor space index) to Adarsh society in exchange of two flats for his relatives. He was also charged with illegally approving as the then revenue minister the allotment of 40 per cent of the flats to civilians when the society was meant for Kargil war widows and defence personnel.<br /><br />The two-member inquiry commission had in its final report indicted Chavan for alleged favouritism to the society.<br /><br />"There was certainly a nexus between the acts of Chavan and benefits derived by his close relatives. The membership process clearly indicates that grant of requisite permission by Chavan was by way of quid pro quo," the report said.</p>
<p>The CBI today sought two-weeks time to file its affidavit in reply to a plea questioning the Maharashtra Governor's order refusing sanction to prosecute former Chief Minister Ashok Chavan in the Adarsh scam.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The application relied on a Supreme Court order and said that the CBI does not require sanction from the governor to prosecute public servants in cases which are being monitored by the judiciary.<br /><br />A division bench of justices P V Hardas and Ajey Gadkari adjourned the plea for two weeks after CBI sought time to file its affidavit.<br /><br />"The Supreme Court ruled that there is no requirement of sanction for the CBI under section 6-A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act to prosecute government servants in cases that are being monitored by the judiciary," the application, filed by former journalist Ketan Tirodkar, said.<br /><br />It further said that the CBI's compilation of documents submitted to the Governor for sanction to prosecute Chavan were foolproof and point out to the "faulty" decision of grant of additional FSI to the society allegedly by Chavan.<br /><br />"In return, Chavan's mother-in-law and brother of his father-in-law were alloted flats in the society," the application claimed.<br /><br />Tirodkar filed the application after Maharashtra Governor K Sankaranarayanan refused permission to CBI to prosecute Chavan.<br /><br />Chavan was accused of approving additional FSI (floor space index) to Adarsh society in exchange of two flats for his relatives. He was also charged with illegally approving as the then revenue minister the allotment of 40 per cent of the flats to civilians when the society was meant for Kargil war widows and defence personnel.<br /><br />The two-member inquiry commission had in its final report indicted Chavan for alleged favouritism to the society.<br /><br />"There was certainly a nexus between the acts of Chavan and benefits derived by his close relatives. The membership process clearly indicates that grant of requisite permission by Chavan was by way of quid pro quo," the report said.</p>