Supreme Court Disagrees with Justice Varma’s Claims Regarding Speaker’s Authority in Judge Removal
The Supreme Court expressed prima facie disagreement with Justice Yashwant Varma's claim that Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla overstepped his authority by unilaterally constituting an inquiry committee. The case involves allegations against Justice Varma regarding "half-burnt currency" found at his residence. The legal debate centers on Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, which mandates joint constitution of a committee if motions are admitted in both Houses. However, the Court questioned if a Speaker is barred from acting if the Rajya Sabha Chairman rejects a similar motion, especially when the Chairman's office was vacant or the motion was not formally admitted.
Key Points
- The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, governs the procedure for the investigation and removal of Supreme Court and High Court judges.
- A removal motion requires the support of at least 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members to be initiated.
- If motions are admitted in both Houses, the Speaker and Chairman must jointly constitute a three-member inquiry committee.
- The Supreme Court is examining whether the Speaker can act independently if the other House's presiding officer has rejected or not admitted the motion.
Exam Facts
- Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968
- Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act
- Justice Yashwant Varma (sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court)
- 140 Lok Sabha MPs signed the notice of motion for removal
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.