- (1.) In my view no interference under Article 136 of the Constitution is called for in this matter except for certain clarifications and directions. As far as the question of appointing a second Member of the Committee is concerned, the Delhi Administration has by its notification dated February 22, 1989 indicated that it is proposed to fill in the vacancy in the Committee caused by the resignation of Justice N.N. Goswarni. However, what has transpired thereafter and the fact that this vacancy still remains unfilled creates doubt as to whether the Delhi Administration has any serious intention to fill in the vacancy with reasonable promptitude or is in a position to do so. In I these circumstances, it is but proper that the Delhi Administration is given time to fill in the vacancy. if so advised, by 3.00 p.m. on Wednesday the 17th May, 1989. The Committee, may unless it otherwise thinks fit, adjourn the hearing of the matter to 18th May, 1989 so that the Delhi Administration has some time to fill in the vacancy, which can be regarded as reasonable considering the delay which has already taken place. As far as the validity of a future order for filling up the vacancy is concerned, I express no opinion thereon at this stage as I do not feel called upon to do so. In the absence of such vacancy being filled in within the said time the matter will have to be proceeded with on the footing that there is no serious desire on the part of the Delhi Administration to fill in the vacancy with reasonable promptitude or it is unable to decide the matter. It appears from the record that the time given to the Committee expires on 22nd May, 1989. It appears to be the undoubted position on the 2 record that at least sizeable delay has been caused in the completion by the Committee of its work by the delay of Delhi Administration in deciding whether the vacancy is to be filled in. In view of this it can be justly expected that the Delhi Administration will extend the time given to the Committee suitably to complete its work.
(2.) Learned Counsel appearing for the Bar Associations has stated that the Bar Associations have no objection to reasonable opportunity being given to the petitioners to cross examine such of the lawyers who have deposed and who were not cross-examined during the time when the petitioners were not represented by counsel. In view of this, the 3 Committee may give adequate opportunity to the petitioners for cross- examining the said witnesses provided that it must he utilised with due diligence and not with a view to muse delay. A show cause notice against the prosecution proposed to be launched against petitioner No. 1. has been issued by the Committee. It will be open to her to show 41 cause against the said notice and the Committee sill decide the question according to law. if she has any grievance against the decision of the Committee in that regard she can take such steps to challenge the same as are open to her in law As far as the order in which the remaining witnesses are to be examined is concerned including the question of cross-examination of such lawyers who have not cross-examined in the circumstances aforesaid, that question will have to be considered by the Committee according to law keeping in mind the directions given by this Court in that connection.
(3.) As far as the question of the change of venue of the Committee is concerned, at this stage, it is not necessary to go into what had happened in the past as it is common ground today that the petitioners are being adequately represented by a counsel of their choice and there is no complaint on the part of the learned counsel that he is not being allowed to represent his clients freely in a proper and befitting manner. In view of this and in view of the assurance given to this Court earlier by Mr. K.K. Venugopal appearing on behalf of the Bar Associations, I have every hope that there will be no occasion in future for any complaint in that connection. In the remote and unfortunate eventuality of such complaint arising in future that question can be considered at that time.;