Recently honorable Supreme Court had pronounced two contradictory verdicts on the appointment of Lokayukta chief selection process in case of Gujarat and Karnataka state affairs. In Gujarat case primacy has accorded to the honorable chief justice of Gujarat high court, whereas in Karnataka case primacy has given to council of minister headed by chief minister.
According to Gujarat Lokayukta Act, 1986, in order to appoint Lokayukta chief, The chief minister must consult the chief justice, he must consult the Leader of Opposition and must then forward the recommendation to the governor who must act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers. But in this entire selection process apex court subverted Montesquieu theory of separation of powers by rendering executive and legislature redundant organs! And governor directly contacted the Attorney general of India and by passed the council of ministers advice.[It's contradictory to Art.163]
In case of Karnataka Dy Lokayukta appointment process, chief minister had failed to have meaningful and effective consultation or discussion with the chief justice of the high court. By citing this cause apex court quashed selection of Dy Lokayukta and it's followed the spirit of Karnataka Lokayukta Act. More over Supreme court bench stated that, the advice tendered by the chief minister will have the primacy and not that of consultees, including high court chief justice![ contradictory to the Gujarat]
I think judiciary has to respect the balance of power by giving due importance to the legislature and executive then only our Indian democracy will further strengthen. Besides, that governor has to act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers in India’s constitutional set up.
Suneel Anchipaka
anchipaka.suneel@gmail.com
According to Gujarat Lokayukta Act, 1986, in order to appoint Lokayukta chief, The chief minister must consult the chief justice, he must consult the Leader of Opposition and must then forward the recommendation to the governor who must act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers. But in this entire selection process apex court subverted Montesquieu theory of separation of powers by rendering executive and legislature redundant organs! And governor directly contacted the Attorney general of India and by passed the council of ministers advice.[It's contradictory to Art.163]
In case of Karnataka Dy Lokayukta appointment process, chief minister had failed to have meaningful and effective consultation or discussion with the chief justice of the high court. By citing this cause apex court quashed selection of Dy Lokayukta and it's followed the spirit of Karnataka Lokayukta Act. More over Supreme court bench stated that, the advice tendered by the chief minister will have the primacy and not that of consultees, including high court chief justice![ contradictory to the Gujarat]
I think judiciary has to respect the balance of power by giving due importance to the legislature and executive then only our Indian democracy will further strengthen. Besides, that governor has to act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers in India’s constitutional set up.
Suneel Anchipaka
anchipaka.suneel@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment