The Narendra Modi government suffered a setback on Wednesday with the Supreme Court upholding the appointment of Justice R.A. Mehta as Lokayukta by the Governor, saying it was done in consultation with the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court.
“The facts make it clear that the process of consultation by the Governor with the then Chief Justice stood complete, and in such a situation, the appointment of Justice Mehta cannot be held illegal,” a Bench of Justices B.S. Chauhan and Ibhrahim Kalifulla said, dismissing the State government’s appeal against a 2:1 majority verdict of the High Court.
“It is pertinent to note that, in order to avoid an inquiry by the Lokayukta [anti-corruption ombudsman], an inquiry commission was set up under the Commission of Inquiry Act by the State government, appointing Justice M.B. Shah, a former judge of this court, Chairman.”
Writing the judgment, Justice Chauhan said the case revealed a very sorry state of affairs. The post of Lokayukta had been lying vacant for more than nine years since November 24, 2003 after the resignation of Justice S.M. Soni. A “few half-hearted attempts” were made to fill the post, but for one reason or another it could not be filled.
However, the Bench also criticised Governor Kamla Beniwal who, it said, “has misjudged her role and has insisted that under the Lokayukta Act, the Council of Ministers has no role to play in the appointment of the Lokayukta and she could therefore fill it in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court and the Leader of the Opposition. Such an attitude is not in conformity or in consonance with the democratic set-up of government envisaged in our Constitution.”
The Bench said: “The appointment of the Lokayukta can be made by the Governor, as head of the State, only with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, and not independently as a statutory authority.”
Keywords: Gujarat Lokayukta, Supreme Court, Justice (Retd) R.A. Mehta, Gujarat Governor, Kamla Beniwal, Narendra Modi Government
Accepting with due respect the fact that the “Chief Minister had full
information and was in receipt of all communications from the Chief
Justice”, does it follow that the Council of Ministers also had “full
knowledge...” and had given its consent? Further, Supreme Court has
said that the Governor did not consult the Council of Ministers, and
communicated "directly" with the CJ of Gujarat HC. It is, quite
evidently, a stricture on the Governor, who has given the go-by for
the Constitutional provisions requiring consultation with the CM and
Council of Ministers. If the opinion of the CJ is to be given
“primacy”, does it mean there is no need to consult CM and Council of Ministers? If so, such a need should be formally abolished, and the CJ should be formally given total authority in the matter of appointing Lokayukta.
Most people out here haven't tracked the news over the years and are just bashing
modi after reading out the headline which, if I may say so, is misleading. This was
not a dispute over setting up of lokayuktas. The question was raised over the single recommended name (usually a set of names are provided) by CJI for the head of Lokayukta which the state govt felt was a close aide of NGOs. Although, the Govt
may be wrong to question the recommendation of CJI, the governor of the state
proved to be no better when she proclaimed herself above the advice and suggestion of council of ministers. This was looked down by the honorable SC bench which declared that Governor has to act as per the advice and suggestion of council.
The Supreme Court verdict is a fitting reply to the intentional apathy
of the Gujarat Government trying to delay the appointment of the
Lokayukta. Probably the highest court has also alluded that the High
Court should have acknowledged the spirit & not merely the ink behind
Article 163 of the Constitution. At least there is one institution that
does not blindly admire Modi's charisma in the state.
It is a pity that in India such appointments are a subject of disputes. The transparency of the process, the honesty of individuals and the overall credentials considered for the selection are all of utmost importance. The truth is that only a patriot can do all these judiciously. And such breed are seldom seen on our political arena.
Most of the comments made appear to be borne out of ignorance of the
facts or or intended to obfuscate the facts. It is due to the
failure of the State govt to appoint a suitable person, acceptable
to the Judiciary too, as the Lokayukta for more than 7 years that
the Governor was constrained to nominate a person in consultation
with the Chief Justice of the State (and not arbitrarily on her
own)for that important post. Modi wanted only one of his henchmen
for the post and this was not acceptable to the judiciary. By
challenging the appointment through all the courts Modi was not
questioning the Governor or the Centre, but the judiciary itself. He
preferred the post to lie vacant all these eight years, rather than
an impartial man of integrity adorning it. Obviously afraid of
justice.
Late but not least. But in between the time to HC to SC, the state
government had had enough time before election, resulted in major
victory. So, their mission was successful to go to the supreme court.
If there is nothing wrong going on in Gujarat, why is BJP afraid of Lokayukta?
This is an big jolt to Narendra Modi for his fresh ruling of present term. He has to go throuhg the exsitign rules of appointment of Lokayukta and given other staes related cases while present its argument before apex court in order to convience that Governor had done mistake or overruled law by appointing lokayukata. Without any option Modi can appeal SC for review of its judgment and during that time he has to produce all verdicts given various high court in this matter to strengthen their arguments if Apext court accept review petition. Now onwards the Lokayukata starts playing pivotal role in order to troble Modi government has Congress got the one more tool to putting pressure on Modi to obey whatever directions and instruction given by Lokayukta without ignoring.
Good judgment...the courts have again come to the rescue of the common man and for probity in public life.
It is disappointing that several judgement of recent times do not
match with the general perception of the public. e.g. the exoneration
of Chidambaram in 2G case, or the summary dismissal of a case between
Sangma and Pranab etc .
every past cm of gujarat had allowed a lokayukt. so, why did mr. modi not allow one since 2002? if he were that squeaky clean as his supporters honk about him, he should have allowed a lokayukt to exist in gujarat.
There's no provision for any kind of impeachment of governor by the
state legislature, nor the Governer can be removed by parliament
unless there's an amendment to the Article 163. The Article 163 states
the question whether any, and if so what, advice was tendered by
Ministers to the Governor shall not be inquired into in any court.
Gujarat Govt. was fighting a lost battle from the beginning. We could
only hope for a better law/amendment where Governor's decision could
be challenged by the legislatures.
Dear Mr. Hemanth,
Can give a list of Congress ruled States where loakyukts have been appointed?
@Sri, please check your facts. The lokayuktas currently are institutions
created by state governments. It is not as if someone imposed a
Lokayukta on Gujrat government.
There are many questions unanswered. Was the justice Sonia Gokani wrong in
upholding the appointment as unconstitutional? Was it not mandatory to consult the
council of ministers before appointment of Lokayuktha or the chief Justice of the
High court of the state can act in lieu of the council of minsters as consultant and the
council of minister are only secondary as the opinion of chief justice of HC has been
held to have supremacy over the council of ministers? I am a lay man as far as law is
concerned. Can anybody please enlighten me whether there are different norms as
regards of appointment of Lokayuktha in different States?
Supreme Court should review this decision as this is clear encroachment by centre on constitutional rights of the state Govt with the help of Governor. In this way we will destroy sovereignty of states.
The governor is mandated to act on the advise of the legislature/ elected govt. Same principle applies at the centre where President is mandated to act on the advise of the elected govt. The Gujarat govt should go in for review of this judgment to a large/ full/ Constitutional bench of the SC. Because this judgment has far reaching impact.Its worth remembering that the Gujarat govt had sent two names over a period of last few years for Lokayukta, to the Governor, and the Governor ignored the requests.
This is the probilem in our nation if any ruling comes against starts suspecting why not for them.Few times i feel that totally we are biased or behaves as hypocrites.
excellent. one lokayukt in karnataka, and nearly 80 of the 117 MLAs of BJP are exposed in corruption etc. once the lokayukt comes, we shall see many more skeletons tumbling out in "ram rajya" of gujarat.
and sri, there are lokayukts in congress ruled states too. check the history.
How about appointing lokayuktha in congress rules states like AP, Delhi, Maharashtra and
others. Why only Gujrat? To use lokayuktha against Modi? We should be consistent. The
rules should apply to all states.
Please Email the Editor