New Delhi, Nov. 14: The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a plea for court monitoring of the probe into the multi-crore deposit collection scam made by amicus curiae and senior advocate Shyam Divan.

However, the court said it would consider the same if the CBI, petitioner or any other person affected in scandal filed a petition.

An amicus is a counsel appointed by the court to assist it in important or tricky cases, so that it gets an independent view from a legal expert as against the rival contentions of the parties to a dispute.

The decision not to entertain Divan’s plea is a temporary breather for the Naveen Patnaik government, which was accused by the amicus curiae of trying to stonewall the ongoing probe by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate.

“We want to know. You are our amicus curiae. You cannot take a stand in the PIL which is for the state or aggrieved party to take…Are you getting instructions from anybody, as our amicus curiae, you should not get it,” the bench, headed by Justice T.S. Thakur, told Divan.

Divan, who had earlier been appointed amicus curiae in the matter, told the court that apart from facing non-cooperation of the state government authorities, the CBI and the ED were facing shortage of infrastructure such as manpower and other resources, and because of that, only four out of the 44 companies under scanner in the state were under investigations.

The counsel said he had got materials from the petitioner and newspaper reports that the Odisha government was not co-operating. After collating all the information he had taken an independent view and arrived at the conclusion that the probe needs to be monitored by the apex court.

However, the court said: “We had earlier left it open to the CBI to approach us. We can understand if Mr Jena (petitioner) or the CBI comes. Do you come on instructions from somebody here? An amicus must stay independent,” the bench observed following which Divan agreed to withdraw his petition.

The court then said that if the CBI, the petitioner or any other person affected in the case could approach the court seeking monitoring of the case, it would be considered on merits. Divan had earlier placed, along with the application, annexures containing newspaper reports about alleged refusal and hostile attitude of the state government in extending co-operation to the probe ordered by the apex court on May 5. The court had ordered a CBI probe into the Saradha and Odisha deposit collection scams.