Irrelevant to the topic and TLDR. Please confine yourself to a) CAG audit of Discoms b) That the demand was originally raised by BJP - not AAP (ie. AAP is only repeating/supporting BJP's demand made well before AAP sprang up) c) That the Discoms have responded to AAP's "demand"  and other AAP's allegations (first publicly raised by AAP in Oct 2012) citing inter-alia AAP co-founder Prashant Bhushan as a party in the case who knows the present Constitutional impossibility of CAG auditing their accounts. Which discom's rebuttal should get equal coverage in this article if AAP's promotional fringe theories are permitted. The defamation has been withdrawn from AAP website's "pol khol" page (which can be independently verified), which is why I again request - stable secondary sources. Several authentic links (for eg. on DERC's website) about Prashant Bhushan's involvement/impleadment are available online and are NOT restricted to your link. He was not acting as a lawyer, he was impleaded as a intervening party and was represented by his brother Jayant Bhushan (who is a senior advocate).