In addition to a detailed complaint, they have also submitted documents supporting their arguments for the need of probe.
New Delhi: Lawyer Prashant Bhushan and former Union...
The three-judge bench hearing the ‘administrative powers of CJI’ case is headed by Dipak Misra himself. Its ruling will be binding on him and all future CJIs.
They have argued that ‘master of roster’ could not be an ‘unguided and unbridled discretionary power, exercised arbitrarily by the CJI by hand-picking benches of select judges.’
While the commission didn’t mention provisions under which IndiGo's market domination would be examined, Competition Act 2002 prohibits abuse of dominant position by any enterprise.
It is argued that India-Israel ties are moving from buyer–seller dynamic to one focused on joint development & manufacturing partnership, a shift 'more durable' than traditional arms sales.
Don’t blame misfortune. This is colossal incompetence and insensitivity. So bad, heads would have rolled even in the old PSU-era Indian Airlines and Air India.
What is indeed shocking is that they wanted to take even the Supreme Court for a ride by spinning webs of theories and illusions, passing them off as FACTS. This is exactly what Rahul is also doing. BUT, he os speaking to gullible, ignorant voters. Hence, HE got away with it. These guys were trying to impress the Supreme Court itself with cobwebs of myths. Naturally, they failed.
“On April 10, 2015, an Indo-French joint statement for acquisition of 36 Rafale jets in flyaway condition through an inter-governmental agreement was issued and the same was approved by DAC (Defence Acquisition Committee). The RFP (Request For Procurement) for 126 Rafale jets was finally withdrawn in June 2015.”
(The full forms of DAC and RFP have been added by me, they are not there in the quoted part of the Times of India article).
This means, 1) first came the declaration, 2) then the approval by DAC, 3) then the withdrawal of RFP.
Shouldn’t this have happened in EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE SEQUENCE????
This question still remains, despite the so called clean chit by the Supreme Court. Does the above not show that the decision was not taken in a fair manner, or was taken by Mr Modi arbitrarily? HAD THE THREAT PEECEPTION TO THE COUNTRY CHANGED? Was the number reduced from 126 to 36 by the IAF independently, and then Mr Modi had gone ahead with the deal?
It will always remain surprising — and unacceptable to commonsense — how the SC could conclude that “established procedures were followed” in this Rafale order.
There was a lot of insinuations against the previous CJI by our English speaking press, liberals.
A similar insinuations campaign should be started by these nincompoops against the present CJI.
What is indeed shocking is that they wanted to take even the Supreme Court for a ride by spinning webs of theories and illusions, passing them off as FACTS. This is exactly what Rahul is also doing. BUT, he os speaking to gullible, ignorant voters. Hence, HE got away with it. These guys were trying to impress the Supreme Court itself with cobwebs of myths. Naturally, they failed.
From TOI Page 15, 15 December 2018
“On April 10, 2015, an Indo-French joint statement for acquisition of 36 Rafale jets in flyaway condition through an inter-governmental agreement was issued and the same was approved by DAC (Defence Acquisition Committee). The RFP (Request For Procurement) for 126 Rafale jets was finally withdrawn in June 2015.”
(The full forms of DAC and RFP have been added by me, they are not there in the quoted part of the Times of India article).
This means, 1) first came the declaration, 2) then the approval by DAC, 3) then the withdrawal of RFP.
Shouldn’t this have happened in EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE SEQUENCE????
This question still remains, despite the so called clean chit by the Supreme Court. Does the above not show that the decision was not taken in a fair manner, or was taken by Mr Modi arbitrarily? HAD THE THREAT PEECEPTION TO THE COUNTRY CHANGED? Was the number reduced from 126 to 36 by the IAF independently, and then Mr Modi had gone ahead with the deal?
It will always remain surprising — and unacceptable to commonsense — how the SC could conclude that “established procedures were followed” in this Rafale order.
There was a lot of insinuations against the previous CJI by our English speaking press, liberals.
A similar insinuations campaign should be started by these nincompoops against the present CJI.
Sour grapes
May be SC order is a tactical one provoking more facts to tumble out.