Rakesh Dixit
There are enough indications
now that Madhya Pradesh Lokayukta PP Naolekar is going to enjoy a tenure that
only French President was privileged to enjoy till 2000—seven years
President of the French Republic term was reduced from
seven to five years and; the first election to a shorter term was held in
2002. President Chirac was first elected in 1995 and again in 2002. Justice Naolekar
is all set to emulate last seven-year term record of French president Chirac.
Last week the state government
indicated that Justice (rtd) P P Naolekar would continue as Lokayukta aftercompletion
of his six-year term on June 28. The government told the office of accountant
general (AG) to continue his emoluments and privileges beyond the month of June
as well.
The state government had
amended the MP Lokayukta and Up Lokayukta Act, 1981 in August last year to
enable the incumbent to continue in office even on completion of his term.
Now that the government has brazenly
obliged the Lokayukta, public-spirited individuals and NGOs are expecting the Ombudsman
to be ashamed enough of the munificence to demit the office. That does not seem
to be happening though.
Chorus building up
A chorus is building up emerging
against the likely continuation of justice (retired) PP Naolekar as Madhya
Pradesh Lokayukta.
A former minister, a retired
district judge, a retired IPS officer are among those who have asked Naolekar
to not accept an extension of service after his tenure of six years, and demit
office gracefully.
Congress leader and former
minister Dr Govind Singh has written a letter to Naolekar, stating that nowhere
in the country there is provision for extension of tenure after retirement, and
hence he should leave his office on the day he completes six years in the
post.
Retired district judge RS
Baghel has advised Naolekar to maintain highest standards of personal as well
as institutional integrity and don't succumb to any allurement (extension of
tenure) from the state government.
Ajay Dubey, a member of
Transparency International, has also urged the Lokayukta to retire on June 28. Dubey has asked him to retire on the due day
and recommend to the government to initiate the process of appointing the next
lokayukta.
Retired IPS officer and former
director general of special police establishment, Lokayukta, Arun Gurtoo
said : "In these days of increasing corruption and abuse of authority, any
visible loss of impartiality or dignity of this organisation shall shake the
confidence of the people in the state government as well as in the ability of
the organisation to deliver."
Senior Congress leader
Satyadev Katare, who had asked the chief minister to initiate process for
appointment of new Lokayukta, said, “I condemn the decision. It’s not justified
and I express strong disapproval of the decision.”
The office of the lokayukta has come under scrutiny in recent times.
While in Gujarat, the then chief minister Narendra Modi remained dead against
appointing a Lokayukta all through his 13-year tenure, in Madhya Pradesh (MP),
Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan seems to be enamored with his lokayukta,
Prakash Prabhakar Naolekar.
In fact, so happy is the cabinet with Naolekar that on August 13, it
extended his term by a year, a good 10 months before his retirement. Even the
deputy lokayukta will continue in his post after retirement if no successor is
appointed, subject to a maximum period of one year. The term of the lokayukta
is six years in MP, unlike five years in other states. With another year’s
extension, Naolekar will stay in office till the age of 72. So what makes this
head of the anti-graft institution so special?
SUSPICIOUS
OPPOSITION
While state parliamentary affairs minister Narottam Mishra defended the
amendment in Section 5 of the MP Lokayukta and deputy Lokayukta Act-1981,
saying it was done to ensure continuity in the posts, the Congress is
suspicious about the motive and timing of the cabinet decision.
The leader of the opposition, Satyadev Katare, attributes Chouhan’s
move to “ambition to bring all constitutional bodies under his control”.
“Lokayukta PP Naolekar is not retiring immediately as his term ends in June
2015. What was the compulsion to increase the tenure when the government is in
a majority and can take such a decision anytime?” Katare asks, wondering if the
government has no trust in judges, who are scheduled to retire soon and may
become eligible for the post.
Lokayukta PP Naolekar has not pursued corruption cases in true
earnestness
Upset that the ruling BJP government in the state did not seek his prior
consent before taking the decision, he registered his protest in a letter to
governor Ram Naresh Yadav. Incidentally, the 1981 Act makes it mandatory for
the government to consult the leader of the opposition, chief minister and
chief justice of the high court at the time of the lokayukta’s appointment.
This gives credence to the view that there is more to this issue than
meets the eye. The alleged bonhomie between Chouhan and Naolekar has been hotly
debated in the state assembly ever since Naolekar, a retired Supreme Court
judge, assumed the lokayukta office in June 2009. Last year, fiery Congress MLA
Kalpana Parulekar even stormed into the assembly carrying a placard, which
alleged that Naolekar was an RSS agent.
TAINTED
LOKAYUKTA?
What has made the opposition see red is the lokayukta’s alleged
kid-gloves treatment towards tainted ministers and bureaucrats for years. The
high court even sent a notice to the lokayukta on September 11 based on a PIL,
asking him to submit a report by October 6, explaining on what grounds
bureaucrats and ministers were let off from alleged corruption charges against
them.
Petitioner P Najpandey claimed that 11 ministers in Chouhan’s cabinet, apart from at least 90 civil servants, were under the lokayukta’s scanner. Some of the complaints were pending for seven or more years, but there was no forward movement as far as prosecution goes.
Petitioner P Najpandey claimed that 11 ministers in Chouhan’s cabinet, apart from at least 90 civil servants, were under the lokayukta’s scanner. Some of the complaints were pending for seven or more years, but there was no forward movement as far as prosecution goes.
Incidentally, the lokayukta had disclosed ahead of the assembly
election in MP last year that it had closed the probe in eight cases of alleged
irregularities against former and present ministers, in reply to RTI activist
Ajay Dubey’s petition. However, the loka-yukta maintained that the probes were
closed for want of solid proof against the accused. “If we get a complaint
backed by solid proof and evidence, we will not spare time in raiding or
catching a powerful and influential person, be it a powerful politician,”
Naolekar had claimed recently to an English magazine.
MISUSING
POSITION
But the opposition is not impressed with his defense. His clean chit to
Chouhan and his wife, Sadhna Singh, in the dumper case four years ago still
rankles the Congress leadership. In this case, Chouhan was accused of misusing
his official position to rent out dumper trucks to an industrial house as a
quid pro quo for allotting a mining lease. Taking cognizance of the lokayukta’s
closure report, a special court had then given a clean chit to the CM.
So forceful was the lokayukta’s clean chit that special judge RPS
Chauhan was moved to observe: “That Shivraj Singh Chouhan should indulge in a
business of petty corruption is not prima facie acceptable because he, as chief
minister of Madhya Pradesh, could siphon off hundreds of crores of rupees
without directly bringing his relatives in the picture. Even otherwise, as soon
as he came to know of this business (of petty corruption), he closed it down,
which only shows his (good) character.”
“Lokayukta
PP Naolekar is not retiring immediately as his term ends in June 2015. What was
the compulsion… when the government is in a majority and can take such a
decision anytime?”
—Satyadev Katare, leader of the opposition, MP Assembly
—Satyadev Katare, leader of the opposition, MP Assembly
Around this time, allegations also flew thick and fast about the
government’s benevolence towards Siddharth Naolekar, son of the lokayukta.
Siddharth is an Indore-based industrialist and considered close to powerful
minister Kailash Vijayvargiya. Last year, Siddharth’s name figured in an FIR
along with five others in a case of alleged cheating by a real estate firm. The
MP High Court, however, stayed the operation on the orders of Indore Junior
Magistrate First Class (JMFC) court.
Another allegation against the lokayukta was that he was not adequately
proactive in compelling the government to give assent for prosecution of the
officers facing probes. More than 100 such requests by the loka-yukta,
including around 40 made in 2013, are pending with the state, despite the apex
court’s direction for clearing such requests in three months. For example, the
state government nod is awaited for prosecuting Indore health officer, Dr
Rajesh Kothari, even a year after multiple lokayukta raids unearthed
disproportionate assets to the tune of `55 crore from his house.
BLAME
IT ON ACT
Worse, Section 197 of the code of criminal procedure, introduced by the
state government, mandates sanction before prosecution of public servants for
criminal offences. So, the anti-corruption watchdog has to wait for sanctions
before prosecution of corrupt babus. Naolekar blames the unresponsiveness of
the state government to the lack of teeth in the present lokayukta act. “There
is a need to make some amendments in the… Act to give more teeth to it. The Act
is about two decades old and needs to be amended,” he argues.
Around a year after assuming office, the lokayukta had remarked that
corruption of lower rung officials like patwaris was more dangerous than of
those in high places. His institution seems to have endorsed this statement in
earnest as it has often trapped petty officials. According to official sources,
in the last five years, as many as 146 cases related to disproportionate assets
(DA) were registered, involving proceeds worth `303 crore between June 29, 2009
and April 30, 2014. Further, the lokayukta has registered 891 trap cases, in
which government officials were allegedly found demanding and receiving bribe
from people during the same period. Between February 1982 and March 2013, the
lokayukta registered 704 cases and seized properties worth Rs. 417.27 crore,
allegedly acquired through corrupt means. MP punished 4,280 gazetted and
non-gazetted officials during the period on the recommendations of the
lokayukta for their alleged involvement in corruption.
The same alacrity should be shown against those in high places too.