UP amends Lokayukta Act, drops HC CJ from selection committee

In the Bill’s objective, it was stated that following the models prevailing in Kerela, Manipur and a few other states, there was a need to set up this committee.

[related-post]

Earlier, the selection committee included the CM, the leader of Opposition and the Chief Justice.

The legislation was introduced on the last day of the Assembly’s monsoon session against the backdrop of a tussle between Governor Ram Naik and Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav on the appointment of Singh as Lokayukta, with the file recommending his name moving back and forth five times. Naik has refused to give his nod on the ground that no proper meeting of the three-member selection committee was held and also because Allahabad HC Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud had expressed reservations citing Singh’s proximity to the ruling Samajwadi Party.

On Tuesday, Naik had returned the file for the fifth time and asked the government to recommend any other name except Singh. He had also claimed that he was not bound to accept the state cabinet’s decision as Lokayukta’s appointment has its own set procedure, in which the cabinet has no role.

The Bill, moved by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Azam Khan, was passed by voice vote amid walkout by BSP, BJP and Congress members. Later, the legislation was also passed in the UP Legislative Council.

When contacted, the Governor said: “At least proper debates were held in both the houses for such an important Bill. As far us my comment on the Bill and its nature is concerned, I will have to examine it first, when it comes to me.”

In the Assembly, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Azam Khan, justifying the amended Bill, said the House comprises elected representatives and it should not vest its powers to others. “Whenever there is a clash between judiciary and legislature, both will suffer losses. During a former PM’s regime, Supreme Court judges were superceded. He did not worry about resignation but took the political decision,” he added.

Khan claimed that BJP has also implemented the new system for appointment of judges in the Supreme Court, “so a different yardstick cannot be applied in states”. “If we take out each others clothes, everyone will be naked. Everybody knows that there is a controversy over the selection of Lokayukta… Since people expect the government to appoint Lokayukta, it (government) should have supremacy in appointing him,” he added.

Taking a dig at the Governor, without taking his name, Khan said: “As many as 635 elected representatives in local bodies have been denied their rights because 12 out of 14 elected mayors, who belong to BJP, do not want to be accountable for their misdeeds. That Bill is still pending with Raj Bhavan. Even a Bill making the CM chancellor of an institute, is still pending.”

“We know that the road ahead is not so clear. But if bills are stopped like this, how will democracy function? There should be a limit to the Governor’s role. It is not Jauhar University Bill that you stamped it with your feet…,” he added.

Targeting Raj Bhavan, he added: “Tell me, has anywhere in the country the list recommending MLCs been stopped? How is it possible that you clear a few names and hold others? What is Raj Bhavan doing and what message it wants to give? It should not be Raj Bhawan of pre-1947. It is a question of the whole House’s dignity.” Khan was referring to the controversy over Naik not giving his approval to five of the nine names recommended by the government for nominated members category in the Legislative Council.

Without naming Justice (retd) Ravindra Singh, Khan said: “Fingers have been raised on a retired HC judge. It is injustice. Where were those who are raising fingers now when he was in judicial service?”

Earlier, Leader of Opposition Swami Prasad Maurya, while opposing the amendment, proposed that it should be sent to a select committee of the House. “The amendment has been introduced in a haste. It would have been better if the Speaker was made the committee chairman. The Chief Justice has been excluded. It means that there is no faith in the judiciary. A better way would have been to amend it with a provision that if one abstains from three consecutive meetings, then the two remaining members can recommend the names,” he added.

While BJP’s Suresh Khanna claimed that the Bill was being amended to appoint a favourable person, Congress leader Pradeep Mathur said the government wants to keep the Lokayukta in its grip.

The Bill was not included in the main agenda of the House but circulated as a supplementary agenda, mentioning that it will be introduced during the session. Later, Speaker Mata Prasad Pandey informed that it will be passed on Thursday itself and sent it to the Legislative Council. He turned down BJP’s request to take it up after Zero Hour as it was the last day of the Assembly session.

The new Bill also empowers Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta to impose a fine up to Rs 1 lakh in case they find that the complaint against any person has been made with malafide intention or is intended to harass him.