
NEW DELHI, Feb 18: Delhi High Court today reserved its order for March 5, on a petition challenging the dismissal of Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat as Naval Chief, after the Attorney General and the petitioner argued at length to put their points of view against and for the “maintainability” of the plea.
A division bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Devinder Gupta and Justice K S Gupta, while reserving its order refused to entertain two intervention petitions at this stage, saying, “We would like to decide the question of maintainability and the
of the petitioner first.”
Questioning the locus standi of Wing Commander (retd) H M Sethi, to file a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to challenge the dismissal, Attorney General (AG) Soli Sorabjee said, “There cannot be proxy litigation in such cases. Bhagwat has consciously and deliberately chosen not to come to the court and therefore no third party can seek relief for him.”
Citing Supreme Court judgments on the locus standi of a third party in such petitions in Justice S P Gupta and Justice Ramaswamy’s cases, Sorabjee said, “When a person, fully conscious of his rights, deliberately chooses not to seek legal remedy for any injury caused to him, a third party has no locus standi.”
Countering Sorabjee’s contention, Sethi said that there was no analogy between the present case and those cited by the AG, as here the Navy Chief had been “unceremoniously” sacked, after being described as a “threat to the nation”, both by the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister.
“Had the matter been confined to the parameters of defence establishment, certainly I would have no locus standi, but here the Chief of Naval Staff has been allowed to go scotfree, after levelling such grave charges against him,” Sethi said.
Requesting for impleading Bhagwat in the case, he said that the defence establishment has an inbuilt system for dealing with an officer or a personnel against whom there are allegations of this nature and if the charges against him were so “serious”, he should have been subjected to “court martial” under the Navy Act.
However, Sorabjee said that the purpose of the PIL was only to help a particular class of people who were not aware of their rights and did not have access to the resources.
“If a person is not ready to accept help from outside, it cannot be thrust upon him,” Sorabjee said, claiming that Bhagwat had even refused to take the copy of the petition from the petitioner, who filed a similar plea in Mumbai High Court.
He said the Mumbai High Court has already dismissed the petition on the question of locus standi of a third party.
The AG said that if the courts start entertaining petitions in such cases, it would open a “Pandora’s Box” and tomorrow the removal of a Governor, Chief Minister or any other officer would be questioned in the court of law by any one.
Questioning the petitioner’s prayer to know the reasons for dismissal of Admiral Bhagwat, the AG said the decision was taken after extensive deliberations by the Cabinet Committee on Defence, which included the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Defence Minister and the Finance Minister.




