Bangalore, July 23 (IANS) The Karnataka High Court Monday gave two days time to the 10-day old new Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government to start the process of appointing Lokayukta (ombudsman), a post that has been vacant since last September.
Chief Justice Vikramjit Sen and Justice Aravind Kumar set July 25 deadline to start the process, rejecting the government's contention that the issue is pending in the Supreme Court.
The judges pointed out that the matter in the apex court pertained to the appointment of Upa Lokayukta (deputy ombudsman) and not Lokayukta.
The Karnataka government has moved the Supreme Court against April's high court order quashing the appointment of retired state high court judge K. Chandrashekaraiah as Upa Lokayukta on the ground that due process was not followed.
The government has sought the apex court ruling on its powers to appoint the Upa Lokayukta.
Karnataka's Lokayukta Act lays down that the ombudsman and the deputy ombudsman will be appointed by the government after "consultation" among the chief minister, the chief justice, leaders of the opposition in the two houses of the legislature and the presiding officers of the two houses.
Chief Justice Sen had taken exception to the appointment of Chandrashekaraiah because he had not agreed to it.
The government's contended that "consultation" does not mean consent has to be there and sought the apex court's ruling on this issue.
Chief Justice Sen and Justice Kumar had last week pulled the government for the "inordinate" delay in the appointment of Lokayukta.
The chief justice had cautioned that he would have to write to the governor that there was constitutional crisis in the state if the government continues to delay the Lokayukta's appointment.
The judges are hearing a public interest petition seeking a directive to the government for early appointment of Lokayukta.
The post has been vacant since Sep 19 when former Supreme Court judge Shivaraj Patil quit following a row over owning two house sites in Bangalore from two cooperative housing societies, allegedly in violation of rules.
|
|
Comments:
