Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, officers of the Government of Maharashtra, challenged the report/recommendation of the Hon'ble Lokayukta dated 26 September 2011 in case No.LO/Com/2686/2009 (T1) and the consequent letter dated 23 May 2013 issued by Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.3, the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ulhasnagar. The petitioners' 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 mandates a hearing before making any recommendations. The court considered the submissions of the petitioners' counsel, Mr. A.N. Irpatgire, and the respondents' counsel, Mr. Suresh M. Kamble and Mr. C.P. Yadav. The court noted that the Lokayukta's report was made without granting any hearing to the petitioners, which is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice and the statutory requirement under Section 10 of the Act. The court held that the procedure under Section 10 is mandatory and failure to grant hearing vitiates the report. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned report and the consequential letter, allowing the writ petitions.
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 government officers without affording them an opportunity of hearing as required under Section 10 of the Act. The Court held that the procedure under Section 10 is mandatory and failure to grant hearing vitiates the report. The impugned report and consequential letter were quashed. (Paras 1-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Lokayukta's report/recommendation made without granting hearing to the affected officers under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971 is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petitions and quashed the impugned report/recommendation of the Lokayukta dated 26 September 2011 and the consequential letter dated 23 May 2013.
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) 40
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, Maharashtra Lokayukta, 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 Lokayukta report and consequential letter for 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 recommending disciplinary action against the petitioners without granting them a hearing as required under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971.
Issues
Whether the Lokayukta's report made without following the procedure under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971 is valid.
Whether the petitioners were entitled to a hearing before the Lokayukta made its recommendations.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the Lokayukta ought not to have made the impugned report without granting them a hearing as required under Section 10 of the Act.
Respondents did not contest the violation of natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi
The procedure under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971 is mandatory and failure to grant hearing to the affected officers before making recommendations 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.
Procedural History
The Lokayukta made a report on 26 September 2011 in case No.LO/Com/2686/2009 (T1). The Government issued a consequential letter on 23 May 2013 to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ulhasnagar. The petitioners filed writ petitions in 2013 challenging these actions. The court heard the matters and delivered judgment on 19 October 2016.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971: Section 10
