The Supreme Court on Monday terminated a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the procedure of selecting the chairman of market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi).
The finance ministry had filed an affidavit countering the allegations, but the court did not go into those issues, deciding instead that the pleas raised were not argued properly.
The apex court said the case focused on an individual rather than on constitutional issues. The court gave the petitioners an option to file a fresh plea citing the legal and constitutional issues, highlighting the concept of regulatory independence.
A bench headed by Chief Justice SH Kapadia said: ?What is being argued before us (by the petitioners) is on the concepts arising out of constitutional law. However, that has not been taken up as a prayer in the writ petition.?
This is the second time the court has taken up and dismissed a petition on these lines filed by a group comprising former Indian Air Force chief S Krishnaswamy, retired IPS officer Julio Ribeiro and former CBI joint director of BR Lal.
The bench observed: ?This writ petition is identical to the writ petition which was dismissed as withdrawn. We expect proper pleadings in the matter where constitutional doctrines are involved, particularly relating to regulatory independence?, adding that under the ?garb of raising a constitutional issue, the petitioners cannot go against a particular person.?
?I am sorry this is all going for publicity,? the CJI said, telling the petitioners that they had not raised the issue of mala fide in their petition. ?Don’t be wishy-washy,? he said.
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate Gopal Subramanium agreed to go by the suggestions of the bench.
The petition had alleged that the new procedure to set up a committee of five members to select the Sebi chief in place of the existing three-member norm was wrong, and there was an ulterior motive behind it. It also questioned the government’s decision not to grant an extension to CB Bhave who headed Sebi before current chief UK Sinha.
The finance ministry had defended Sinha’s appointment, saying no rules were changed for appointing the chairman and no members were under corporate pressure. Terming the PIL motivated and misconceived, the ministry had said it was filed just to espouse the cause of some disgruntled former officers of Sebi. It said Sinha was the unanimous choice of the search & selection committee and that no undue favour was shown to him by his appointment at the post.