SC seeks Centre's response on PIL alleging CAG appointment not fair & transparent

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday sought a response from the Centre on a PIL challenging the procedure for appointment of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on ground that it is “not independent, fair and transparent”.

A bench presided over by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud issued notices to the Ministries of Law and Justice and Finance on the PIL filed by Anupam Kulshreshtha and others.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the PIL petitioners, contended the existing system of the executive appointing the CAG lacks transparency.

The petitioners sought direction to ensure a fair, transparent, and independent appointment process for CAG as outlined in Article 148 of the Constitution.

At present, the plea contended, “CAG is directly appointed by the Executive without any prescribed procedure. That such a procedure is against the very observations made by this Court in the CEC Judgement. That the CAG being directly appointed by the Executives, will always be in a state of obligation or feel indebted to the one who appointed him,” it said.

Citing constituent assembly debates, the plea said B R Ambedkar and others hailed the CAG as the "most important officer under the Constitution” as President has to appoint the CAG under his hand and seal.

The plea said current procedure involves the Cabinet Secretariat shortlisting names for the Prime Minister's consideration, from which the Prime Minister sends one name to the President.

“However, this process, where the President approves a single name proposed by the Prime Minister, contradicts the Constitution's intent for the CAG's independence. The appointment process virtually entrusts the high constitutional post of the CAG to the Cabinet Secretary, allowing arbitrary shortlisting without established criteria. The Prime Minister then holds sole discretion in choosing from the Cabinet Secretary's shortlisted candidates, rendering the process arbitrary and against constitutional mandates," it added.

The plea sought a direction to “declare that the procedure adopted for the appointment of CAG is against the mandate of the Constitution of India and the same is not independent, fair and transparent”.

The plea said the Supreme Court in the CEC judgement said that it is important that the appointment must not be overshadowed by even a perception, that a ‘yes man’ will decide the fate of democracy and all that it promises.

"The present situation is such that the process adopted for appointment of CAG prima facie appears to lack independence and seems to be yet another post under the absolute control and allegiance to the Executive,” the plea said.