Complaint made on 4 February 2014
February 4, 2014
To
(i) Mr Goolam E. Vahanvati, The Attorney General of India ,
Supreme Court of India
(ii) Mr Rajiv Mehra, Additional Solicitor General to the
Union of India, Delhi High Court
(iii) Mr P K Behera, In-charge Litigation, Union of India,
Delhi High Court
Copy to:
(i) The Chief Justice of India
(ii) The Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court
(iii) The Registrar General, Delhi High Court
(iv) Chairman, Bar Council of Delhi
(v) All other members of Bar Council of Delhi
(vi) The Delhi Police Commissioner
(vii) The Registrar Vigilance, Delhi High Court
(viii) Central Vigilance Commissioner
Ref: Whistle-blower
corruption and right to life Writ Petition pending in the Delhi High Court
since February 2012 – Writ Petition (Civil) 1280/ 2012 – in the matter of Seema
Sapra versus General Electric Company & Others AND Complaint against Mr R V
Sinha, Advocate for unauthorised representation of the CVC (Respondent 2) in
this matter without any vakalatnama
This is to bring to your notice that Mr R V Sinha, Advocate
who appears to be a Union of India panel lawyer and also a panel lawyer for the
Railway Ministry and for the CBI, is appearing in the captioned matter for the
Central Vigilance Commission since 4 February 2013 without authority, without
instructions from the CVC, and without filing any vakalatnama for the CVC.
No vakalatnama has been filed by R V Sinha on behalf of the
CVC. Mr R V Sinha has merely filed a
memo of appearance signed only by him and this document cannot confer authority
on him to represent the CVC in these proceedings. This memo of appearance filed
on 14 January 2013 is at pages 78-79 of Part B of the court file in WP Civil
1280/ 2012.
I point out the decision of the Supreme Court of India in
Uday Shankar Triyar v. Ram Kalewar Prasad Singh [(2006) 1 SCC 75] which clearly
sets out the law that no advocate can be permitted to represent a party in
court proceedings without producing a validly executed vakalatnama. I have
verified from the office of the CVC that it appoints lawyers for court cases by
executing vakalatnamas.
Mr R V Sinha has earlier appeared in the captioned matter
for the Railway Ministry (respondent 4) in place of his real brother, Mr R N
Singh who is a panel lawyer for the Railway Ministry and who appears to be the
advocate on record in this matter for the respondent 4 (the Railway Ministry). Mr
R V Sinha’s previous appearances for the Railway Ministry are recorded in
several court orders.
The CVC is independent of the executive of India and directly appoints its own
lawyers through duly executed vakalatnamas. Union of India lawyers (including
Railway or CBI panel lawyers) cannot appear for the CVC in proceedings where
the Union of India is a separate party.
Only duly appointed panel lawyers are permitted to represent
the Union of India or its agencies by filing memos of appearance.
The CVC does not maintain a panel of lawyers and appoints
its lawyers for its court cases on a case-by-case basis and through duly
executed vakalatnamas. An advocate can only represent the CVC in court
proceedings after producing a duly executed vakalatnama in his favour.
The captioned matter involves high –level corruption by General
Electric and Mr Montek Ahluwalia in Railway tenders worth Rs 127,000 crores for
two Projects to set up a diesel locomotive factory at Marhowra and an electric
locomotive factory at Madhepura respectively.
The whistleblower petition produces complaints and evidence
of corruption, fraud, forgery, bribery and other illegal practices committed by
General Electric Company, its subsidiaries, its employees and agents in
connection with these two Railway Ministry tenders for Projects to set up
diesel and electric locomotive factories at Marhowra and Madhepura
respectively. These two Projects with long term purchase and service contracts
are together worth over Rs 127,000 crores to the selected bidder/s. Not only
are these Projects against the national and public interest but as described in
the writ petition these tenders are tainted with corruption, illegal lobbying,
fraud, forgery, and bribery with high level Government of India functionaries
including Montek Singh Ahluwalia having conspired with General Electric to
create and award these lucrative tenders to General Electric.
The prayers in the captioned writ petition interalia seek
disqualification and blacklisting of General Electric Company and its two
involved subsidiaries, action on the corruption complaints by the Railway
Ministry in accordance with law, investigation and prosecution of the
corruption complaints, and protection and safe housing for the petitioner and
the enforcement of her right to life.
The PMO, the Delhi Police, the CBI, the CVC, the Railway
Ministry, General Electric Company, GE India Industrial Private Limited, GE
Global Sourcing India Private Limited, Bombardier, Siemens, EMD (a US
company and a subsidiary of Caterpillar), Alstom, and BHEL have all been issued
notice in the captioned matter.
The Bar Council of Delhi has also been issued notice in the
captioned matter in April 2013.
The CVC was issued notice by the Delhi High Court on 7 March
2012 and was duly served with the court summons in 2012. Yet the CVC did not
appear in this matter for 24 subsequent hearings.
On 16 January, 2013, this matter was listed before Justice
Nandrajog and Justice Veena Birbal when Mr R V Sinha appeared and stated that
he was representing the CVC, i.e., respondent 2. He stated that he had filed
his memo of appearance for the CVC. The petitioner had pointed out to the court
that Government of India panel lawyers could not represent the CVC which
appointed its own lawyers and that therefore Mr R V Sinha could not represent
the CVC without a signed vakalatnama, and that a mere memo of appearance signed
by Mr R N Singh himself would not be sufficient. Justice Nandrajog and Justice
Veena Birbal did not permit Mr R V Sinha to represent the CVC on that day, and
directed him to file a vakalatnama and did not record his presence in the court
order passed that day.
The matter was subsequently transferred to a different Bench
and on 4 February, 2013, this matter was listed before Justice Gita Mittal and
Justice Midha. Mr R V Sinha again appeared for the CVC on this date without
having filed a vakalatnama and unfortunately subsequent court orders continued
to record his appearance for the CVC.
Mr R V Sinha is not authorised to represent the CVC in this
matter and he is colluding with General Electric Company to cover up the
corruption complaints which are the subject matter of W.P. Civil 1280/ 2012.
A false, misleading, and unauthorised affidavit dated 27
February 2013 has been filed through Mr R V Sinha for the CVC in this matter
without proper instructions This affidavit which does not appear to be a
genuine document has apparently been signed
by one Mr Rajiv Verma, “working as Under Secretary under the respondent”.
Mr R V Sinha’s appearance in this matter for the CVC without
a vakalatnama constitutes a fraud on the court, an attempt to interfere with
and obstruct the administration of justice in the captioned matter, contempt of
court, and constitutes gross misconduct by Mr R V Sinha.
CM 6717/ 2013 filed by the petitioner on this issue and
pending hearing in the captioned matter seeks the following relief:
“PRAYER
It is
therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(a)
Direct that Mr R V
Sinha cannot represent the CVC, i.e., respondent 2 in this writ petition as he
has not produced a vakalatnama, and also because he has previously appeared in
this writ petition for the Railway Ministry (respondent 4), and also because
his real brother is the counsel for the Railway Ministry (respondent 4) and
this creates a serious conflict of interest;
(b)
Direct that Mr R
N Singh cannot represent the Railway
Ministry (respondent 4) in this writ petition because he and his brother’s
appearances in this matter for the CVC and the Railway Ministry have created a
serious conflict of interest situation and valid concerns about collusion
between the CVC, the Railway Ministry and General Electric in subverting these
writ proceedings and in subverting the administration of justice;
(c)
Direct that the
respondent 2 (CVC) appoint a competent and authorised counsel to represent it
in this writ petition and that it issue proper instructions to such counsel;
(d)
Direct that the
respondent 4 (Railway Ministry) appoint a competent and authorised counsel to
represent it in this writ petition and that it issue proper instructions to
such counsel;
(e)
Reject as inadequate the
deficient, evasive, false and fraudulent affidavits filed in this matter by
both Mr R N Singh and Mr R V Sinha for the CVC and the Railway Ministry, and
direct both the CVC and the Railway Ministry to file proper, complete, true,
and competent affidavits in this matter through properly authorised and
instructed counsel;
(f)
Direct that the names of both
Mr R V Sinha and Mr R N Singh be removed from the Central Government’s panel of
nominated counsel;”
I request that you urgently direct/ recommend an inquiry
into this issue to find out how Mr R V Sinha is appearing in the captioned
matter for the CVC without any valakatnama, and that consequential action be
pursued against Mr R V Sinha for this misconduct. This is a serious issue and
requires your attention.
Seema Sapra
Advocate
No comments:
Post a Comment