Modi loses battle with Guv Beniwal in SC on Lokayukta

NEW DELHI: Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi on Monday lost his grudge battle with Governor Kamla Beniwal over the appointment of Justice R A Mehta as Lokayukta with the Supreme Court on Wednesday upholding her choice and rejecting Modi's objections as misplaced. A bench of Justices B S Chauhan and F M I Kalifulla held that the consultation process for appointing the Lokayukta, in which the high court chief justice's views enjoy primacy, has been completed, the SC has no cause to reopen the selection procedure. But if the court criticized Modi for adopting a "my way or highway" approach in opposing Justice Mehta's name and suggesting other names for Lokayukta, it frowned upon Governor Beniwal's decision not to consult the CM and directly seeking opinions from the Gujarat high court chief justice and Attorney General on the appointment. It also ticked off the HC for using immoderate language. The court, however, rejected allegations of bias against Justice Mehta saying actions of a vigilant citizen in drawing attention to the apprehensions of a minority community cannot be seen as motivated. And while the council of ministers can have a say in the appointment, it ought not to have the final word. The SC ruling comes as a setback for Modi who has sought to counter criticism that Gujarat did not have a Lokayukta for long by arguing that the appointment was politicized by the Governor on the instance of Congress. The Gujarat government claimed the then leader of Opposition in the state Shaktisinh Gohil didn't attend meetings called to discuss the appointment while the Raj Bhawan named a choice seen to be anti-Modi. The SC order deflates the Modi government's contention and the CM will have to accept the continuance of Justic Mehta as Lokayukta. The court directed the Gujarat government to immediately provide necessary infrastructure and staff to make the Lokayukta office functional as Justice Mehta did not join office because of the pendency of the state government's appeal in apex court. The post of Lokayukta had been lying vacant since November 24, 2003, when Justice S M Soni had resigned. Congress promptly welcomed the ruling that comes soon after Modi's third electoral win as the CM. "Only after the Lokayukta begins functioning will we see the true state of corruption and governance in Gujarat," said Congress spokesperson Rashid Alvi. Although the bench upheld the HC's decision, it disapproved the harsh criticism of Modi by the HC and said "we are of the view that the Judge, even if he did not approve of the 'my-way or the highway" attitude adopted by the chief minister, ought to have maintained a calm disposition and should not have used such harsh language against a constitutional authority, that is the CM." The court was also critical of Beniwal's role and said, "The present Governor has misjudged her role and has insisted, that under the Act, 1986, the Council of Ministers has no role to play in the appointment of the Lokayukta, and that she could therefore, fill it up in consultation with the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court and the Leader of Opposition. Such attitude is not in conformity, or in consonance with the democratic set up of government envisaged in our Constitution." Modi had objected to Justice Mehta's appointment as Lokayukta on the ground that he had shared a platform with persons who were known for their antagonism against the state government and that he had been a panelist for such NGOs, social groups and had expressed his dissatisfaction with the manner in which the present government was functioning. Justice Chauhan, writing the judgment for the bench, said there was no merit in the CM's objections. "If a vigilant citizen draws the attention of the state/statutory authority to the apprehensions of the minority community in the state, then the same would not amount to a biased attitude of such citizen towards the state. "We are of the opinion that the views of the Chief Minister in this regard may not resonate with those of the public at large and thus, such apprehension (of bias against the state government) is misplaced," the bench said. The court also warned against leaving the finality of the choice of Lokayukta to the council of ministers headed by chief minister. It said this "would be akin to allowing a person who is likely to be investigated, to choose his own Judge". It said the Lokayukta Act, which was enacted to remove corruption from public life, would be rendered meaningless if a pliant Lokayukta was allowed to be appointed by the state government. "The Lokayukta Act may be termed as a pro-people Act, as the object of the Act is to clean up Augean stables, and in view thereof, if a political party in power succeeds in its attempt to appoint a pliant Lokayukta, the same would be disastrous and would render the Act otiose," the bench said. "A pliant Lokayukta, therefore, would render the Act completely meaningless/ineffective, as he would no doubt reject complaints under Section 7 of the Act, at the instance of the government, taking the prima facie view that there is no substance in the complaint, and further, he may also make a suggestion under Section 20 of the said Act, to exclude a public functionary, from the purview of the Act, which may include the Chief Minister himself," the apex court said. Source: TOI