The Congress leader said that within hours of 64 MP's submitting the impeachment motion, Rajya Sabha leader (Finance Minister Arun Jaitley) had expressed naked prejudice by calling it a "revenge petition" virtually dictating the verdict to Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu on that day.
He said it appears that the government at the Centre is not keen on holding an inquiry into the matter; by scuttling the inquiry, it does not want some information to come on record. A Supreme Court judge can be removed for misbehaviour or incapacity only by an order of the president after winning a majority in both houses of parliament and after obtaining at least two-thirds of votes from the house members in the same session. Naidu's decision has struck a big blow to the Opposition's plans.
He maintained that the impeachment motion was not meant to insult or lower his dignity but to take the allegation against him to its logical conclusion.
"And for that the condition is only one - it should be signed by 50 members of Rajya Sabha".
Internal matter of the Supreme Court Curiously, the order also refers to the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Kamini Jaiswal v. Union of India, which forms the basis for the second ground for impeachment as proposed by the MPs.
Flyers stay alive with second win
Now Philadelphia has to do it again at home , a place where the Penguins outscored the Flyers 10-1 while rolling in Games 3 and 4. The challenge will be even greater because the Penguins always seem to bring their "A" game at the Wells Fargo Center.
Senior Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan also criticized Venkaiah Nadu for rejecting the impeachment motion.
The party was doing great a disservice to the independence of the judicial system, it said.
"This act of members of discussing the conduct of the Chief Justice in the press is against propriety and Parliamentary decorum as it denigrates the institution of the CJI", Mr Naidu said.
Congress veteran Kapil Sibal accused Naidu of acting in a "partisan manner", despite heading a post which requires "utmost constitutional integrity". Previously 64 MPs belonging to 7 political parties signed the notice for impeachment proceedings against the CJI. If there is evidence, then there is a committee which has to take a decision on the same.
"The order is unprecedented, illegal, ill-advised and hasty", Sibal said, adding that it had been passed without a full-fledged enquiry. And since the Chairman's order pertains to the CJI, if challenged in the top court, it is likely to be heard by judges who are next in line in terms of seniority and experience.