Not Jantar Mantar or Ramlila, no biz challenging top cop's appointment: Centre to HC

New Delhi: The Centre told the Delhi High Court on Wednesday that "intermeddlers" cannot be allowed to challenge the appointment of Gujarat-cadre IPS officer Rakesh Asthana as Delhi Police Commissioner."This is not Jantar Mantar or Ramlila Maidan," submitted Solicitor General Tushar Mehta before a bench headed by Chief Justice D N Patel.

The bench was hearing a PIL by one Sadre Alam against the appointment of Asthana along with an intervention application by an NGO which has challenged the appointment before the Supreme Court.

"Both have no business challenging the appointment... Any intermeddlers can't come to court," he added.

The bench, which also comprised Justice Jyoti Singh, issued notice on the PIL and sought the Centre and Asthana's stand while listing the matter for further hearing on September 8.

Mehta said the petition before the high court "seems to have been copied" from the NGO's plea filed before the apex court.

"It appears that Mr Alam seems to have copied and followed the dangerous path of Mr Bhushan (NGO's counsel). The debutant should be stopped," said the counsel who went on to express his misgivings towards "ready-made petitioners" and "systematic pattern" of criticising all government-made appointment.

"(The petitioner) must be investigated. It is very serious... It is too much for a coincidence that same typographical error was possible," he added.

Mehta sought time to respond to the petition on merit and said the court has to hear the "affected officer" as well before any order is passed.

Appearing for the NGO, Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), lawyer Prashant Bhushan stated that Alam's petition was mala fide and a "complete copy-paste" of the plea pending before the apex court.

He clarified that he did not intend to argue before this court as the NGO's plea was pending before the Supreme Court.

B S Bagga, counsel for petitioner, maintained that the plea was not a product of "copy-paste".

Significantly, the Bhushan has insisted in his intervention application, arguing that Alam's petition had been copy and pasted for the sole purpose of interrupting the proceedings in his plea, which has been filed and taken up by the Supreme Court.