The Centre, defending Chawla’s appointment in the face of serious allegations of impropriety levelled by senior BJP leader Jaswant Singh, objected to the court’s plea. The Centre had given its opinion to the Presidential reference on the question of Chawla’s appointment. The ASG, terming the said communication between the Cabinet and the President as “privilege communication”, expressed his helplessness.

However the Bench, also comprising Justice Dalveer Bhandari, brushed aside the excuse of the government counsel and said, “In these times of Right to Information, there is nothing called privilege communication.”

The remarks came during the hearing of the petition filed by Singh seeking Chawla’s removal on the ground that he would not be able to discharge his duties impartially in view of several allegations of impropriety against him.

Senior advocate Soli Sorbajee commenced the arguments on behalf of the petitioner even though the ASG and senior advocate Ram Jethmalani made fervent pleas before the court to adjourn the matter. Commenting on the fact that both the ASG and Jethmalani were preoccupied with the quota hearing, Sorbajee said, “Even this matter is of considerable importance and there are a number of law officers (who could argue the case).” Agreeing with him, Justice Bhan said, “We have to hear the arguments and we have to finish it.”

The court, during the day-long hearing, also sought to know whether the Cabinet gave any opinion to the Presidential reference on a petition by Singh for the removal of Chawla and if yes, what was the opinion. Another significant question raised was whether the Chief Election Commissioner could act independently on the removal of an Election Commissioner.