Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, officers of the Government of Maharashtra, challenged the report/recommendation of the Hon'ble Lokayukta dated 26 September 2011 and the consequent letter dated 23 May 2013 issued by Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.3, the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, Ulhasnagar. The grievance was that the Lokayukta made the impugned report without following the procedure under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971, which requires that before making any report, the Lokayukta shall give the public servant a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The petitioners argued that no hearing was granted to them before the report was made. The court examined the provisions of Section 10 of the Act and noted that it mandates an opportunity of hearing. The court found that the Lokayukta had not given any hearing to the petitioners before making the report. The court held that the report was in violation of the principles of natural justice and the statutory requirement. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned report and the consequential letter. The court directed that if the Lokayukta wishes to proceed further, it shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and then pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Right to Hearing - Section 10, Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971 - The Lokayukta made a report recommending disciplinary action against the petitioners without affording them an opportunity of hearing. The court held that Section 10 of the Act mandates that before making any report, the Lokayukta shall give the public servant a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The failure to do so vitiates the report. The court quashed the report and the consequential letter. (Paras 3-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Lokayukta can make a report/recommendation against a public servant without granting him a hearing as required under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971.
Final Decision
The court quashed the impugned report of the Lokayukta dated 26 September 2011 and the consequential letter dated 23 May 2013. The court directed that if the Lokayukta wishes to proceed further, it shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and then pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to hearing
- Section 10 Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act 1971
- procedural fairness
- quashing of report
Case Details
2016 LawText (BOM) (10) 39
Writ Petition No. 5173 of 2013 with Writ Petition No. 5171 of 2013, Writ Petition No. 5172 of 2013, Writ Petition No. 6353 of 2013
Anoop V. Mohta, G.S. Kulkarni
Mr. A.N. Irpatgire for the Petitioner, Mr. Suresh M. Kamble for Respondent No.3, Mr. C.P. Yadav, AGP for the Respondent-State
Dattatraya s/o Nagnath Bhadakawad, Suresh s/o Keshav Gholap, Uttam s/o Shivram Lonare, Mohan s/o Sachanand Chijwani
The State of Maharashtra, The Assistant Registrar, The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ulhasnagar, Shri Vishwas s/o Prabhakar Shende
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions challenging the report/recommendation of the Lokayukta and consequential letter for alleged violation of natural justice.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the Lokayukta's report dated 26 September 2011 and the consequential letter dated 23 May 2013.
Filing Reason
The Lokayukta made a report without granting hearing to the petitioners as required under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971.
Issues
Whether the Lokayukta's report is vitiated for non-compliance with Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971, which requires a hearing before making a report.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that no hearing was granted before the Lokayukta made the report, violating Section 10 of the Act and principles of natural justice.
Respondents did not dispute the lack of hearing but argued that the report was only a recommendation.
Ratio Decidendi
Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971 mandates that before making any report, the Lokayukta shall give the public servant a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Failure to do so violates natural justice and vitiates the report.
Judgment Excerpts
The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Hon’ble Lokayukta ought not to have made the impugned report without following the procedure under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971, inasmuch as a hearing ought to have been granted to the Petitioner before making any recommendations.
Section 10 of the Act mandates that before making any report, the Lokayukta shall give the public servant a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
The report is quashed. The consequential letter dated 23 May 2013 is also quashed.
Procedural History
The Lokayukta made a report on 26 September 2011. The State Government issued a letter on 23 May 2013 to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ulhasnagar. The petitioners filed writ petitions in 2013 challenging the report and letter. The High Court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 19 October 2016.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971: Section 10
