SC versus SC
Dinakaran being hounded for being a Dalit: It is ironical that the responsible and hon’ble MPs should have raised the issue of caste in the case of Paul Dinakaran. Dalit MPs have come out against the impeachment motion moved against Justice P D Dinakaran, chief justice of Karnataka High Court, alleging that he was being persecuted for being from the Scheduled Castes. The parliamentary forum of SCs, which includes MPs cutting across party lines, came out strongly against the impeachment move which, incidentally, has been admitted in Rajya Sabha. Calling it “discrimination”, the dalit MPs passed a resolution demanding that an inquiry should be instituted against all judges who have charges of corruption against them and one person should not be singled out. SC forum chairman Radhakant Nayak told TOI that the resolution would be submitted to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The move may put the Centre in a quandary over the impeachment proceedings in the upper House. It is, however, significant that Congress MPs have not signed the memorandum for impeachment submitted to Rajya Sabha Chairman Hamid Ansari by the Opposition which includes BJP, Left and SP.
Conspiracy against Dalit: P L Punia, Congress MP from UP, termed it a conspiracy against a dalit. “We will ensure that Congress opposes the impeachment move,” he said. The bureaucrat-turned-parliamentarian said Dinakaran was in the age-group that he would make it to CJI’s post if he was elevated to Supreme Court now. Coming down on the system of impeachment, Punia pitted Dinakaran’s case against other similar proposals. He said it was strange that the impeachment proceedings against Justice Soumitra Sen of Calcutta HC did not create much flutter while the one against Dinakaran had attracted a great deal of attention. While the Dinakaran episode has been cited by top lawyers as a case of corruption in judiciary, the rush of political comments laced with identity politics may dent the course of debate. Observers recalled that once the impeachment move started against Justice V Ramaswamy in 1990, MPs from the southern states termed it a plot against a fellow native, slowly bringing pressure on the central government which finally let him off the hook. The Dinakaran issue resonated in Parliament on the last day of the winter session when J D Seelam and Pravin Rashtrapal, SC MPs from Congress, tried to raise it in Rajya Sabha. While they were not allowed to speak, their attempt showed a concerted bid by dalit members to underline the “caste dimension” to the controversy. Nayak nuanced the demand from dalit MPs. He said, “The forum is not against impeachment of Dinakaran but it wants that all the judges with allegations of corruption should be inquired into. Proper inquiry and not media reports should be the basis of action.”
Finally, the issue of Paul Dikaran has been reduced to caste issue in spite of the elite and educated judges involved in the issue. Though, the Dravidian ideologists have already started playing such casteist twist to the issue, it is Mayavati who now writes to PM pointing out such tag writing to PM. A day after the parliamentary forum of SC MPs criticised the impeachment move against the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, BSP supremo and UP chief minister Mayawati joined the chorus against miscarriage of justice in the PD Dinakaran row. In a secular society it is ironical that Paul Daniel Dinakaran Premkumar should be put in such caste and religion cards to cover up the corruption charges.
08-08-08: When Paul Daniel Dinakaran Premkumar was on Friday August 8th, 2008, sworn-in Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court by Governor Rameshwar Thakur at a function organised at the Glass House of Raj Bhavan in Bangalore, none thought of his caste or religion. After as a Judge of the Madras High Court, he was elevated to the post of Chief Justice and posted to the Karnataka High Court. Mr. Dinakaran, accompanied by his wife and daughter, went round exchanging pleasantries with the dignitaries and introduced them to Mr. Thakur and Mr. Yeddyurappa. And the latter never thought that he came there, because Jsyalalita cases were heard in Bangalore or he would side with Karunanidhi in the cases of Kaveri or Ogenakkal.
09-09-09: Within a year, because of his land grabbing controversy and connected charges, his career was called into question.
Charges against Paul Dinakaran: Accusing the judge of abusing his judicial office, the motion alleged that Justice Dinakaran –
- passed dishonest judicial orders in matters where he had personal and direct pecuniary interest.
- Allegations listed in the impeachment motion include possessing wealth disproportionate to known sources of income,
- unlawfully securing five housing board plots in the name of his wife and two daughters,
- entering into benami transactions, and
- acquiring and possessing agricultural holdings beyond ceiling limit.
- Other allegations related to illegal encroachment on government and public property to deprive Dalits and poor of their livelihood,
- violation of human rights of Dalits and poor and
- destruction of evidence during official enquiry.
Congress and DMK MPs did not sign the Notice: The first step against justice Dinakaran, who has stayed away from judicial work, was taken on Monday by a group of 75 members of the Rajya Sabha, who presented a petition to Mr Ansari. The 55-page notice, listing 12 acts of alleged misbehaviour by Justice Dinakaran, was submitted to Ansari under Judges (Enquiry) Act, 1968. Barring Congress and DMK, MPs of almost all parties in Rajya Sabha signed the notice. Under the Constitution, judges of Supreme Court and high court can be removed only through impeachment by Parliament. An impeachment process against a Supreme Court judge Justice V Ramaswamy in the early 90s fell through when the motion was not carried in the Lok Sabha. The elevation of Justice Dinakaran has also been put on hold after it was mired in controversy. Justice Dinakaran also reportedly suggested to Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan to set up a three-judge in-house panel to probe the charges.
SC collegiums drops the proposal of elevation: The collegium led by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and including Justice S H Kapadia, Tarun Chatterjee, Altamas Kabir and R V Raveendran met last evening and decided to take back the recommendation for his elevation. Earlier, the Law Ministry had rejected the August 27 recommendation of the collegium and asked it to reconsider the decision. Rajya Sabha Chairman Hamid Ansari had yesterday admitted a notice of the motion by MPs to start impeachment proceedings against Dinakaran over land-grabbing allegations.
|Advocates call for Dinakaran transfer: The Advocates Association of Bangalore today demanded the transfer of Karnataka High Court chief justice P D Dinakaran who faces an impeachment motion for alleged disproportionate assets and land-grabbing. “We had demanded the transfer of justice Dinakaran when he met the members of the (Supreme Court) Collegium in the first week of December and we reiterated the demand today,” Putte Gowda, president of the Association, said. The demand comes a day after a notification was issued by the high court registrar-general R B Budhihal stating that justice Dinakaran will not take up judicial matters until further orders. Justice Dinakaran had been on leave for a week and had not been presiding over the court proceedings.
Coming from Taminadu, he could not keep up Tamil tradition: Rajaraja Cholan of chola dynasty had been a great warrior, and excellent administrator. One of his inscriptions prohibits anybody becoming a judge, if any one of his / her forefather was connected with any immoral activity and that yardstick was used for the last seven generations. Thus, the judicial system was carried out without any problem. But now, everybody knows how judges are appointed by the politicians. Even other connected posts like Standing Councils, PP etc., are shared by the ruling coalition with percentage. Moreover, caste and religion also come into play. So naturally, the appointed judges have to work for his masters. Of late, these politically appointed judges start attending public functions and moving with all. The so-called “out of chamber” relationship and friendship has been extended to their masters. Everytime, they go their states, they meet their CMs who recommended her posting to supreme court and High court. Therefore, if Indian judges follow some ethics, it woulkd be better.
 It is wrong and illegal also to raise such issue, as he was from a converted family and being a practicing Christian now.
 It is onluy because of the press that created the hype. At the time of swearing over ceremony, the press never made it a big issue that he was a SC / Dalit or a Christian and so on!
 Press Trust Of India / Chennai/ Bangalore December 18, 2009, 0:48 IST