CAG Shashi Kant Sharma has 'unblemished' record: Centre to Delhi HC

New Delhi: The Centre told the Delhi High Court that Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) Shashi Kant Sharma has an “unblemished record” as a civil servant and his appointment to the post has been made as per the practice being adopted in past. “He (CAG) is having an unblemished service record as a civil servant,” Attorney General G E Vahanvati, appearing for the Centre, told a bench of acting Chief Justice B D Ahmed and Justice Vibhu Bakhru. The law officer objected to the submission of Prashant Bhushan, appearing for former Chief Election Commissioner N Gopalaswami and eight other eminent citizens, that the present CAG has the “greatest degree” of conflict of interest in the country as he had been an “integral” part of defence deals during 2003 to 2013 which could be the subject matter of scrutiny in future by the top auditing body. The bench, which has so far not issued a notice, is hearing two separate PILs filed by the former CEC and others and advocate M L Sharma on the issue. [caption id=“attachment_1021207” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] Shashi Kant Sharma in this file photo. IBN-Live[/caption] The petitions have sought quashing of the appointment of the CAG and a direction to the Centre to frame guidelines for appointment of the top auditing officer of the country. “Many scams and waste of public money would not have come to light without a robust CAG at the helm of affairs,” Bhushan said adding “this is the most important office under the Constitution.” “The present CAG suffers from the bias as he has the greatest degree of conflict of interest because of the fact that he has been integrally associated with almost all the defence procurement deals during 2003 to 2013. Moreover, he has no expertise in the field of accounting,” he said. The court has fixed the matter for hearing on the admissibility of the pleas on 29 August when Vahanvati would put forth arguments. During the hearing, Bhushan said the appointment of the CAG violated the principles of “institutional integrity” as held by the apex court in the Central Vigilance Commissioner P J Thomas case. The Centre’s plea that the CAGs, in the past had been appointed from among the public servants does not make the appointment valid and constitutional, he argued. “The CAG, which is not a multi-member body, will have to sign the audit reports pertaining to the defence deals and hence, he can neither act dispassionately and nor recuse in the event of conflict of interest,” the lawyer said. The appointment procedure is not transparent and is rather an act of arbitrariness, he said, adding that earlier, till 1978, the CAGs were appointed from among the officers of Indian Audit and Accounts Services. Earlier, the court had agreed to hear the PILs and asked the Centre to file its response by 8 August. The PILs allege the Union of India has arbitrarily appointed the CAG, keeping aside all established practices provided by the Supreme Court in its judgement relating to the appointment of Central Vigilance Commissioner P J Thomas and the appointment made in the Punjab Public Service Commission. PTI