Saturday, Aug 08, 2020 | Last Update : 03:07 PM IST

136th Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra49026232728117092 Tamil Nadu2850242275754690 Andhra Pradesh2069601204641842 Karnataka164924842322998 Delhi1427231282324082 Uttar Pradesh113378668341981 West Bengal89666630601954 Telangana7525753239601 Bihar7179446294400 Gujarat68855517922604 Assam5549737225132 Rajasthan4941835186763 Odisha4255028698292 Haryana4005433444467 Madhya Pradesh3729827621962 Kerala3170019147103 Jammu and Kashmir2392716218449 Punjab1901512491462 Jharkhand140705199129 Chhatisgarh10109761369 Uttarakhand8008484795 Goa7075511460 Tripura5520367528 Puducherry4147253758 Manipur301818147 Himachal Pradesh2879171013 Nagaland24056594 Arunachal Pradesh179011053 Chandigarh120671520 Meghalaya9173305 Sikkim7832971 Mizoram5022820
  India   All India  15 Feb 2019  Anil Ambani case: SC sacks 2 officials for order tampering

Anil Ambani case: SC sacks 2 officials for order tampering

THE ASIAN AGE. | J VENKATESAN
Published : Feb 15, 2019, 6:23 am IST
Updated : Feb 15, 2019, 6:23 am IST

The order specifically stated that “personal appearance is not dispensed with.”

Anil Ambani
 Anil Ambani

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has summarily dismissed two court masters — Manav Sharma and Tapan Kumar Chakraborty — for tampering with the January 7 order directing the personal appearance of Reliance Communication’s chairman Anil Ambani. Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi passed this order on Wednesday evening exercising his disciplinary powers as the head of the institution.  

It was stated that a bench of Justices Rohinton Nariman and Vineet Saran passed an order on January 7 directing the personal appearance of Anil Ambani in the court in the contempt petitions filed by Ericsson. The order specifically stated that “personal appearance is not dispensed with.”

 

However, when the order was uploaded on the Supreme Court website, the crucial word “not” was omitted. Instead, it read “personal appearance is dispensed with.” Even in the summons issued to Mr Ambani, it said “personal appearance dispensed with.”

This discrepancy was brought to the notice of the bench on January 10 by Dushyant Dave, the senior counsel appearing for Ericsson.

The bench headed by Justice Nariman informed the counsel that the bench had specifically required the presence of Mr Ambani. Thereafter, a revised copy of the order was uploaded.

The court then ordered a probe as to how the word “not” was omitted in the order, which was initially uploaded and when it was served on Mr Ambani. It revealed that there was a tampering in the order by the two officials, prompting the Chief Justice of India to take disciplinary action and ordering their summary dismissal from service.

 

It may be recalled that the court, on Wednesday, had reserved verdict on the contempt petitions filed by Ericsson against Mr Ambani and two other directors who were present in the court both on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Tags: anil ambani, supreme court
Location: India, Delhi, New Delhi