Prashant Bhushan on Tuesday filed an RTI seeking copy of the administrative order constituting a five-judge bench to hear the impeachment case.
Hours after two Congress MPs withdrew their plea challenging the rejection of impeachment motion notice against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra by Rajya Sabha Chairman Venkaiah Naidu, advocate Prashant Bhushan on Tuesday filed an RTI seeking copy of the administrative order constituting a five-judge bench to hear the impeachment case.
In his RTI application, Bhushan has sought information from the central public information officer of the Supreme Court regarding the listing of the case before a five-judge constitution bench and also who had passed the administrative order.
“Was writ petition of Pratap Singh Bajwa and another vs Chairman, Rajya Sabha and another listed on May 8 before a constitution bench by way of an administrative order? If yes, who has passed passed the order above mentioned,” the RTI application filed by Bhushan said.
It further said, “Kindly provide me the copy of the order and allow me to inspect the concerned file along with any file noting concerning the said order”.
The Congress MPs, who had challenged the rejection of the impeachment notice, withdrew their petition from the Supreme Court after it showed reluctance to part with the administrative order on the constitution of a larger bench to hear the matter. The two MPs confronted a five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice A K Sikri and demanded a “copy of the administrative order by which a constitution bench was constituted overnight”.
The bench, also including Justices S A Bobde, N V Ramana, Arun Mishra and Adarsh Kumar Goel, told senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the two lawmakers that giving a copy of the administrative order “will not lead to anywhere”.
The bench, which comprised judges who are 6 to 10 position in terms of seniority, expressed reluctance to go into their contention questioning the setting up of a larger bench to hear the matter.
“It is a piquant and unprecedented situation where CJI is a party and other four judges may also have some role. We don’t know,” the bench said when Sibal asked where can he mention the matter for seeking the administrative order.
(With PTI inputs)