Retired justice RA Mehta’s refusal to take up the post of Gujarat lokayukta demonstrates how much the State regime’s detractors have politicised the issue
Surprisingly, Justice (Retd) RA Mehta of the Gujarat High Court has withdrawn himself as the State’s lokayukta, saying that he cannot perform his constitutional duty fairly as the Narendra Modi Government had opposed his name from the beginning. In his letter to Gujarat Governor Kamla Beniwal, Mr Mehta has pointed out that he had decided not to accept the post because of the damage done to his credibility by the State regime.
There are many reasons for his not taking charge as the lokayukta in spite of the Supreme Court clearing the process of his appointment seven months ago. The post had been lying vacant for the past one decade. The Congress and the BJP keep blaming each other for the appointment on this constitutional post. Today, everyone knows that all key positions like in the CBI, the IB and now the lokayukta are becoming puppets of the ruling Government. Even the watchdog agencies are working as per the convenience of the Government at the Centre. This has already been witnessed in the case of Karnataka. The role of Mr Hans Raj Bhardwaj, the Governor of Karnataka, was more political than constitutional. Even the role of the Gujarat Governor in Mr Mehta’s appointment, had come in for criticism from various quarters.
‘Problems of Redressal of Citizens Grievances', is the subject on which the Administrative Reforms Commission headed by Morarji Desai, who later became the Prime Minister of India, gave its first report. It is that report which recommended the establishment of the lokpal and the lokayukta institutions at the Central and the State levels respectively, for redressal of citizens’ grievances, by investigating into administrative actions taken by or on behalf of the Union Government or a State Government or certain public authorities. These institutions were intended to serve as entities independent of the Government concerned and as institutions to supplement the judicial institutions headed by Chief Justices or Judges of the Supreme Court of India or the High Court of a State.
The recommendation for the appointment of lokayuktas, as indicated in that report, was made to improve the standards of public administration, by looking into complaints against administrative actions, including cases of corruption, favouritism and official indiscipline in administrative machinery. Nowadays, the purpose of constitutional institutions is forfeited and these institutions are merely working under hands of the Government.
The appointment of the lokayukta in Gujarat ran into unnecessary controversy and delay due to the biased approach of the Governor of Gujarat. According to Article 163(1) of the Constitution of India, the Governor has to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. But, in the present case, the Governor issued the Warrant of Appointment of Mr Mehta on August 25, 2011, on her own, without any aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. This was not acceptable to the Modi Government and the issue became a subject of intense disagreement between the Governor and the Chief Minister .
A few facts revealed by the State Government on Mr Mehta cannot be ignored. Mr Mehta chose to rely on unsubstantiated news reports and alleged that nearly `45 crore had been spent by the State Government on the litigation concerning his appointment. But, according to a senior officer of the State Government, till date, the Government of Gujarat has incurred an expense of approximately `1.6 crore. Mr Mehta had also stated, somewhat uncharitably, that the cost of this litigation is more than the cost of operating the High Court of Gujarat. This is also untrue because the High Court has a total budget of `79.62 crore in the current year.
Effective functioning of institutions in a democracy requires harmonious functioning and interaction between the three wings — legislature, executive and judiciary — in view of the spirit of the Constitution and the ratio as laid down by Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case. But, in case of the appointment of the Gujarat lokayukta, that spirit was vitiated.