<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre not to appoint Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) and Vigilance Commissioner (VC) without taking its permission.<br />A bench of Chief Justice H L Dattu and Madan B Lokur asked the government to submit the details about the selection process by January 14.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Centre, told the court that he will be filing the relevant records pertaining to the selection process in a sealed cover. The court, taking his submission into account, allowed the government to go ahead with the process but after submitting all materials.<br /><br />A PIL filed by NGO Centre for Integrity, Governance and Training in Vigilance Administration, contended that the Centre was going ahead with the appointment of CVC and VC without giving wide publicity to the vacancies arising on the completion of tenure of the then CVC Pradip Kumar and the then VC J M Garg. Kumar and Garg completed their tenure on September 28 and September 7, respectively.<br /><br />Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani and advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioner NGO had earlier referred to the July 21 letter issued by the secretary, department of personnel and training (DoPT), to secretaries in government to suggest names for empanelment for the post of CVC and VC, claming it aimed at keeping away the common people. The letter was contrary to the direction issued by apex court in the case of Vineet Narayan Vs Union of India, they had contended.<br /><br />They also claimed that it was not necessary to put a restriction that every person who applied for the post should be a civil servant.<br /><br />However, the government submitted before the court which raised question over lack of transparency, that the Cabinet Secretary and 36 other secretaries proposed the names of 120 people for the post, out of which 20 names are taken and five people are shortlisted and forwarded to the selection committee.<br /><br />The court had on August 4 issued notice to the Centre on a PIL filed by the NGO seeking to restrain the government from proceeding ahead with the appointment. The petitioner also sought direction to make the appointment of CVC and VCs more transparent through public advertisement on the lines of Lokpal.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre not to appoint Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) and Vigilance Commissioner (VC) without taking its permission.<br />A bench of Chief Justice H L Dattu and Madan B Lokur asked the government to submit the details about the selection process by January 14.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Centre, told the court that he will be filing the relevant records pertaining to the selection process in a sealed cover. The court, taking his submission into account, allowed the government to go ahead with the process but after submitting all materials.<br /><br />A PIL filed by NGO Centre for Integrity, Governance and Training in Vigilance Administration, contended that the Centre was going ahead with the appointment of CVC and VC without giving wide publicity to the vacancies arising on the completion of tenure of the then CVC Pradip Kumar and the then VC J M Garg. Kumar and Garg completed their tenure on September 28 and September 7, respectively.<br /><br />Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani and advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioner NGO had earlier referred to the July 21 letter issued by the secretary, department of personnel and training (DoPT), to secretaries in government to suggest names for empanelment for the post of CVC and VC, claming it aimed at keeping away the common people. The letter was contrary to the direction issued by apex court in the case of Vineet Narayan Vs Union of India, they had contended.<br /><br />They also claimed that it was not necessary to put a restriction that every person who applied for the post should be a civil servant.<br /><br />However, the government submitted before the court which raised question over lack of transparency, that the Cabinet Secretary and 36 other secretaries proposed the names of 120 people for the post, out of which 20 names are taken and five people are shortlisted and forwarded to the selection committee.<br /><br />The court had on August 4 issued notice to the Centre on a PIL filed by the NGO seeking to restrain the government from proceeding ahead with the appointment. The petitioner also sought direction to make the appointment of CVC and VCs more transparent through public advertisement on the lines of Lokpal.</p>
