Sibal, who has been vocal for early action on the notice, has claimed that he has not received any email from the Rajya Sabha secretariat, which confirmed having sent the same to his official email thrice during the past six months.
He has questioned the need for verification of signatures and the delay in initiating the process in March when the notice was submitted on December 13, 2024.
While 55 MPs have signed the notice for the removal of Justice Yadav, the signature of one of the MPs, Sarfaraz Ahmed, appears twice on the notice. The Rajya Sabha Secretariat is verifying how his signature appeared twice on the notice and whether they are forged.
Ahmed, the JMM MP from Jharkhand, has already met Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar on the issue and confirmed having signed only once and not twice, sources said.
They also said the notice for removal of Justice Yadav, which was submitted by 55 opposition MPs, is undated and not addressed to anyone.The Constitution states that a judge can only be removed from service after both Houses of Parliament approve a motion with a two-thirds majority of the present members. Thereafter, the President has to grant approval to the same.Such a motion can be moved in the Rajya Sabha only after 50 MPs sign the same. For Lok Sabha, signatures of 100 MPs are needed.
According to sources, Sibal, a former Union minister and now an Independent MP, is yet to verify his signature with the Rajya Sabha Secretariat even after three reminders on his official email in the last six months.
“I have met Chairman Dhankhar several times but he has never raised the issue of verification of my signatures on the notice for the removal of Justice Yadav as I am the presenter and initiator of the entire process,” Sibal told PTI.
He also mentioned that the need for signature verification arises only when someone questions the signatures on the notice. He also questioned the delay and said the House chairman should accept or reject the notice and not delay the process.
Sibal has been extremely vocal on the issue and has questioned the delay in the acceptance of the notice for removal of Justice Yadav by the Rajya Sabha chairman.
He has said that such a judge should not be protected and has called for the removal of Justice Yadav for making communal remarks at an event last year.
While he has also questioned the logic behind the six-month period taken for signature verification, sources point out at least 10 MPs were yet to verify their signatures before the Rajya Sabha Secretariat which has sent them reminders to do so on March 7, March 13, and May 1.
P Chidambaram said the physical document (notice) was shown to him for the first time on Tuesday for verification of his signature, which he has done. However, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat did not confirm the same.
The MPs whose signatures have not been verified and were yet to respond to the email queries of the Rajya Sabha secretariat include AAP’s Raghav Chadha and Sanjeev Arora, TMC’s Sushmita Dev, Kerala Congress MP Jose K Mani, Ajit Kumar Bhuyan, G C Chandrasekhar and Faiyaz Ahmed.
Rajya Sabha Chairman Dhankar had already addressed the issue in the House during the last session and confirmed that the representation by MPs has to be verified and the process was underway.
“I have taken all procedural steps, but I must share with you one concern that is engaging my attention. Of the 55 members, who signed the representation, a member’s signature appears on two occasions and the member concerned has denied his signature.
“I do not wish to get into this act which may graduate to culpability to a higher level. If the number is above 50, I will proceed accordingly. Most of the members have cooperated. Those members, who have not done so far, may please do it in response to the second mail sent to them. Then, the process will not be delayed at my level even for a moment,” he told the House on March 21 this year.
Rajya Sabha sources said the possibility of a criminal investigation by the Ethics Committee and the Privileges Committee into the notice seeking the removal of Justice Shekhar Yadav in the House cannot be ruled out as the document bears “forged” signatures.
Article 124 of the Constitution states, “A Judge of the Supreme Court shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting has been presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.”
“Parliament may by law regulate the procedure for the presentation of an address and for the investigation and proof of the misbehaviour or incapacity of a Judge under clause (4),” it adds.
