Srivastava’s appointment to PCA ‘improper’: Legal experts

“Other than impropriety,a majority of disputes which will come before Srivastava as member of PCA will be controversies during his own tenure as DGP of UT Police. There will be instances where his own decisions/orders may come under the scanner,” senior lawyer R S Cheema told Chandigarh Newsline. The former Punjab Advocate General added that if at all a former Chandigarh Police cop was to be appointed,it should be someone who retired few years back.

Stating that Srivastava’s appointment has sent a “very wrong messge” to the common man,Advocate Navkiran Singh said,“the confidence of people is lost. Such an appointment will only send a signal to the common man that it is an attempt to shield the Chandigarh Police officials”.

Advocate H C Arora,also an RTI activist,said even the appointment of Pradip Mehra,former UT Advisor as PCA Chairman,is in direct contravention of Supreme Court directions. According to Arora,as per an apex court judgment,a PCA should be headed by a retired high court or Supreme Court judge. Commenting on Srivastava’s appointment,Arora said,“Prejudice and personal bias is inherent in a person who has remained head of the police force. There will be some police officials who will be in his good/bad books and have remained his subordinates in the recent past. It is improper to appoint him member of an authority which is to pass orders against errant police officials.”

Striking the same chord,high court lawyer A P S Shergill asked,“how can he (Srivastava) be fair and impartial? The Chandigarh Administration should have appointed someone from outside,who has served as a senior cop in some other state. Such authorities (PCA) are constituted to repose the faith of public.”

When contacted,UT Home Secretary,Anil Kumar,declined to comment. Despite repeated phone calls K K Sharma,UT Adviser to UT Administrator remained unavailable for comments.

It will be relevant to mention here that the Chandigarh Administration had been opposing the orders and jurisdiction of PCA tooth and nail. Initially,it reduced PCA to a toothless body by passing a notification that PCA can only recommend and not direct. The same was set aside by the high court last year in October directing the Administration to give powers to the PCA.

Aggrieved,the Administration had filed a review petition seeking modification of high court orders which was dismissed on Friday.