Senior Advocate Indira Jaising told the Supreme Court today that lawyers engaged in the case challenging UK Sinha’s reappointment as Chairperson of SEBI, were threatened..The public interest litigation petition filed by one Uday Babu Khalwadkar came up for hearing before a 3-judge Bench presided by Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justices R Banumathi and UU Lalit..Jaising began her submissions by stating that there were many difficulties during the filing of the petition..“Advocates who were involved in the case have been receiving calls asking how they have filed this petition. We have had to change AoRs multiple times”, she said..She then proceeded to state that Sinha has been Chairperson for 5 years, the maximum tenure allowed. Jaising argued that whether a fresh reappointment can be made after 5 years is a matter that has to be decided by the courts..Her second submission was that Sinha’s was not included in the list sent by the selection committee to the government..“The committee was asked to send the gentleman’s name after the process was completed by the committee.”.Jaising’s third submission was that Sinha required a Vigilance clearance since he was cited as a person who interfered in the Sharda scam. The Bench, however, refused to entertain the plea and dismissed the case.
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising told the Supreme Court today that lawyers engaged in the case challenging UK Sinha’s reappointment as Chairperson of SEBI, were threatened..The public interest litigation petition filed by one Uday Babu Khalwadkar came up for hearing before a 3-judge Bench presided by Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justices R Banumathi and UU Lalit..Jaising began her submissions by stating that there were many difficulties during the filing of the petition..“Advocates who were involved in the case have been receiving calls asking how they have filed this petition. We have had to change AoRs multiple times”, she said..She then proceeded to state that Sinha has been Chairperson for 5 years, the maximum tenure allowed. Jaising argued that whether a fresh reappointment can be made after 5 years is a matter that has to be decided by the courts..Her second submission was that Sinha’s was not included in the list sent by the selection committee to the government..“The committee was asked to send the gentleman’s name after the process was completed by the committee.”.Jaising’s third submission was that Sinha required a Vigilance clearance since he was cited as a person who interfered in the Sharda scam. The Bench, however, refused to entertain the plea and dismissed the case.
