Dehradun: A division bench of Justice Pankaj Purohit and Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma of Uttarakhand high court on Tuesday recused itself from hearing the case of judicial officer Dhananjay Chaturvedi, former district and sessions judge of Chamoli, who was suspended on charges of misusing his position. During his suspension, Chaturvedi was attached to the office of district and sessions judge, Champawat.The suspension order was issued by then registrar-general, Anuj Kumar Sangal, on July 24, stating that the judge had abused his official position while obtaining self-serving statements from his subordinates and advocates appearing in his court and obtaining call-detail records of a female employee, which is an infringement of her personal right to privacy and breach of the law relating to summoning the call records of any person. On April 11, a show cause notice was issued to Chaturvedi after a complaint was filed against him.We also published the following articles recentlyCAT bench recuses itself from IFS Sanjeev Chaturvedi caseThe Nainital bench of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has directed the registry to place the cases before the chairman to assign the case of IFS officer Sanjeev Chaturvedi vs Central government to another bench. Chaturvedi moved the CAT for summoning his appraisal as recorded by the Appointment Committee of Cabinet (ACC) and copy of 360-degree appraisal rules. Chaturvedis lawyer requested that the case be heard by some other bench. Chaturvedi submitted that he never made any such statement before the chairman and requested audio-video recording of all future proceedings.One 3-Judge bench can scrutinise another 3-Judge benchs ruling: SCSupreme Court turns down Centres objections to scrutinizing another benchs verdict on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and land acquisition law. The court points out that it has previously done a similar exercise on the interpretation of land acquisition law. A three-judge bench had earlier differed with another three-judge bench and the matter was referred to a larger bench. The divergent views were on the interpretation of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.May ask 7-Judge bench to rule on validity of sedition law: CJI ChandrachudThe Supreme Court is determined to rule on the constitutional validity of the sedition provision under Section 124A. CJI D Y Chandrachud considers a plea for a seven-judge bench. A five-judge bench had upheld the validity of Section 124A in the Kedar Nath Singh case. The CJI will decide soon. The three-judge bench scheduled the hearing on petitions questioning the validity of Section 124A in January.

Stay updated with all the Dehradun Latest News headlines here. For more exclusive & live news updates from all around India, stay connected with NYOOOZ.