HC slams ‘copy-paste’ petition against Asthana’s appointment as Delhi top cop

A bench of chief justice DN Patel and justice Jyoti Singh made the remark when the petitioner’s counsel was unable to explain the averments made in his plea, which advocate Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of the intervenor NGO, claimed to be “copied”.

New Delhi: The Delhi high court on Thursday said a petition challenging the appointment of IPS officer Rakesh Asthana as Delhi Police commissioner was a “copy-paste”, and warned the petitioner to be cautious in the future.

The Delhi high court was hearing a public interest litigation against the appointment of Asthana as Delhi Police commissioner. (Arvind Yadav/HT PHOTO)

A bench of chief justice DN Patel and justice Jyoti Singh made the remark when the petitioner’s counsel was unable to explain the averments made in his plea, which advocate Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of the intervenor NGO, claimed to be “copied”.

The court said the petition was entirely copied, including full stop and comma, from another plea filed with similar prayers before the Supreme Court. It said that the lawyer, who is the author of the petition which has been copied, is waiting in the queue to argue.

“All these things you have copied from the memo of the senior advocate (referring to Bhushan). If you are copying, you do it 5% and write 95% of your own. Here, 97 to 99% is copied even with all the full stops and commas. Don’t do this in the future, we have tolerated it this time,” the bench said.

Advocate BS Bagga, appearing for the petitioner, said, “I don’t know from where these allegations have come from”.

The high court was hearing a PIL by Sadre Alam, a lawyer, against the appointment of Asthana along with an intervention application by NGO Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan, which has challenged the appointment before the Supreme Court.

During the day’s hearing, when Bagga started his argument on inter cadre transfer, the chief justice asked him what he meant by “super time scale”.

The court repeatedly asked the same question which he was unable to explain and sought time to check and come back.“We are asking you for the last time, we will dismiss the petition with costs. You have copied from his memo that is the problem. Without understanding, you are reading. Now we want an additional explanation. What is the super time scale,” the bench said.

While addressing Bhushan, the bench said, “You people are also distributing your copies (of the petition) everywhere. Don’t do this. He does not know what is super time scale is. You are doing it in good faith but it becomes a weapon. I have asked the question deliberately.”

The Centre, in its affidavit, has said that the appointment of Asthana as Delhi Police commissioner was done in the public interest, keeping in mind the diverse law and order challenges faced by the national capital, which have national security implications as well as international/cross border implications.

Asthana, in his affidavit, has told the court that there is a sustained social media campaign against him and the legal challenge to his appointment was an abuse of process of law, arising from vendetta.

He said that ever since he was appointed Special Director, CBI, proceedings are being consistently filed against him by certain organisations as part of a “selective campaign”.

While dictating the order, the bench said, “counsel appearing in… started with an argument on inter cadre transfer. He simply read over paragraphs without explaining anything. When the word ‘super time scale’ was read, we asked a question whether he can explain or not and the counsel for the petitioner was unable to explain what is the meaning of super time scale in the service jurisprudence.”

The counsel sought time and the court listed the matter for further hearing on September 27.

The petitioner has sought quashing of the July 27 order issued by the Union home ministry appointing Asthana as the Delhi Police commissioner, and also the order granting inter cadre deputation and extension of service to him.