Mehta declines Gujarat Lokayukta's post, blasts Modi govt

August 7, 2013
Ahmedabad, Aug 7: Justice R A Mehta, whose appointment as Gujarat Lokayukta was opposed by Narendra Modi, today declined to assume office, saying the controversy has "denigrated" the office of the anti-corruption watchdog.
guj

A retired Gujarat High Court judge, Mehta, blasted the Modi government for calling him "biased" and "anti-government" while opposing his appointment.

A Lokayukta unwanted by the government cannot get all the necessary and timely support from it, he said in a letter to Gujarat Governor Kamla Beniwal who had appointed him, triggering a standoff with the Modi government.

Maintaining that the "appointment has lost all the grace and dignity", the former judge said he was withdrawing his consent as "he could not persuade himself to accept the office of Lokayukta".

"I humbly withdraw my consent for the appointment as the Gujarat Lokayukta and decline to assume the office. Kindly accept my request and relieve me," Mehta said in his 7-page letter.

"I am averse to any controversy and try to keep away. The present controversy has denigrated the office of the Lokayukta and adversely affected its credibility. The appointment has lost all the grace and dignity," he said.

By-passing the state government, Governor Beniwal had appointed Mehta as Lokayukta on August 25, 2011. This was followed by a legal battle which lasted almost two years as state government sought to overturn his appointment and contested it till the last remedy of a curative petition was rejected by the Supreme Court.

Assailing the Modi government, Mehta said, "The objection alleging anti-government bias (though negatived by the courts), really hurts. Some think that if a person is not pro-government, he is necessarily anti-government. They can't accept that there is third category, neither pro nor anti, but independent and neutral. Their mindset is clear- their way or no other way."

Mehta has also cited Gujarat government's "reluctance" to notify his appointment in the state gazette even after its three petitions were rejected by the apex court.

"Even after three judgements of the Supreme Court, the reluctance of the State Government to notify the Lokayukta appointment in the official Gujarat Government gazette is surprising, but not unexpected," he wrote.

"I frankly admit that I will not be able to fulfil the public duty, public need and high public expectation from the Lokayukta in the circumstances.

"How can I take the responsibility and become the Lokayukta when my objectivity and credibility are not accepted by the government and by the public functionaries whose conduct the Lokayukta may have to investigate? Findings and recommendations - for or against a public functionary- will always be under question mark," Mehta said. Mehta also criticised the Gujarat Lokayukta Bill 2013 passed by the state Assembly in April which allows a six member committee headed by the Chief Minister to choose the Lokayukta.

"Giving a voice and primacy to such public functionaries to decide, who is to be their investigator, would give an impression that they want it to be their 'caged parrot' and the institution of the Lokayukta would lose all credibility and respect of the people and deter many judges from accepting," he said.

Mehta lamented the way the state government invited him to take charge of Lokayukta office after the Supreme Court judgment on its curative petition was rejected.

"The letter of the Gujarat government dated July 26, 2013 (delivered at my Ahmedabad residence while I was in USA) does not indicate any invitation or interest by the government. As if the government has no interest or role in the matter...no invitation and no notification by the government!," he said.

"Persistently and tenaciously approaching the Supreme Court (SLP, Review Petition, and Curative Petition) at huge public expense. It may be compared to the budget for the Lokayukta office or even of the High Court (which deals with lakhs of cases every year). It would be an eye-opener," he wrote, blaming the Modi government for his decision.

He also complained about state government's "non-cooperation" to provide enough infrastructure and budgetary support for the Lokayukta office.

"If the Lokayukta has to depend on the reluctant non-cooperative government for all infrastructure, staff, budget etc, and to beg or fight for it, it is not in my nature. In this scenario, the Lokayukta will not able to function effectively and to fulfil the high public expectations," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 15,2024

amitshah.jpg

Union minister Amit Shah on Friday, November 15, said PM Narendra Modi will amend the Waqf Act despite opposition from leaders like Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

"Modi ji wants to change the Waqf Board law, but Uddhav ji, Sharad Pawar and Supriya Sule are opposing it," Shah said, addressing a rally at Umarkhed in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district.

"Uddhav ji, listen carefully, you all can protest as much as you want, but Modi ji will amend the Waqf Act," he said. Shah said there are two camps in the November 20 Maharashtra assembly polls, one of 'Pandavas' represented by the BJP-led Mahayuti and the other of 'Kauravas' represented by Maha Vikas Aghadi.

"Uddhav Thackeray claims that his Shiv Sena is the real one. Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Aurangabad to Sambhajinagar? Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Ahmednagar to Ahilyanagar? The real Shiv Sena stands with the BJP," Shah said.

"Rahul Baba used to say that his government would credit money in the accounts of the people instantly. You were unable to fulfil your promises in Himachal, Karnataka, and Telangana," he said.

Shah said the Mahayuti alliance has promised that women will get Rs 2,100 per month under the Ladki Bahin Yojana. "Kashmir is an integral part of India and no power in the world can snatch it away from us," Shah said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 12,2024

ikramuddinkamil.jpg

The Taliban regime has appointed Ikramuddin Kamil as the acting consul in the Afghan mission in Mumbai, Afghan media has reported.

It is the first such appointment made by the Taliban set up to any Afghan mission in India.

There was no immediate comment from the Indian side on the appointment that came.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan has announced the appointment of Kamil as the acting consul in Mumbai, the Taliban-controlled Bakhtar News Agency reported on Monday, citing unnamed sources.

"He is currently in Mumbai, where he is fulfilling his duties as a diplomat representing the Islamic Emirate," it said.

The appointment is part of Kabul's efforts to strengthen diplomatic ties with India and enhance its presence abroad, the media outlet said

Kamil holds a PhD degree in international law and previously served as the deputy director in the department of security cooperation and border affairs in the foreign ministry, it said.

He is expected to facilitate consular services and represent the interests of Afghanistan in India, the report added.

Kamil's appointment comes days after the external affairs ministry's point-person for Afghanistan held talks with the Taliban's acting defence minister, Mullah Mohammad Yaqoob, in Kabul.

Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's deputy foreign minister for political affairs, also posted on X about Kamil's appointment.

The appointment of Kamil is seen as part of efforts to facilitate consular services to the Afghan population in Mumbai.

There has been almost negligible presence of diplomatic staff at the Afghan missions in India.

Most of the diplomats appointed by the Ashraf Ghani government have already left India.

In May, Zakia Wardak, the seniormost Afghan diplomat in India, resigned from her position after reports emerged that she was caught at the Mumbai airport for allegedly trying to smuggle 25 kg of gold worth Rs 18.6 crore from Dubai.

Wardak had taken charge as the acting ambassador of Afghanistan to New Delhi late last year, after working as the Afghan consul general in Mumbai for more than two years.

She took charge of the Afghan embassy in New Delhi last November, after the mission helmed by then ambassador Farid Mamundzay announced its closure.

Mamundzay, who was an appointee of the Ghani government, had moved to the United Kingdom.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.