Central Lokpal Act vis-a-vis Odisha Lokayukta Act: Firstly, like the Central Act (Section 25-3), the Odisha Bill should have made the transfer of an investigating officer of Vigilance organization dependent on the approval of Lokayukta. Secondly, like the Central Act (Section 25-4), the Directorate of Vigilance should have been given power to appoint a panel of Advocates, other than the Government Advocates, with the consent of Lokayukta for conducting cases referred to by the latter. Thirdly, like the Central Act (Section 25-5) the Odisha Bill should have provided for the obligation of the State Government to provide as much funds as is necessary to the Directorate of Vigilance for conducting effective investigation into cases referred by the Lokayukta. Conspicuous omission of these enabling provisions in the Odisha Lokayukta Bill 2014 is not only ultra vires the parent law, but would render the Directorate of Vigilance an effete and subservient instrument, to be used by the ruling elite only for their partisan ends and as well for vindictive action against the innocent anti-corruption activists on the ground of ‘false, frivolous and vexatious complaints’. And as per Article 254 of the Constitution, any provision of law made by a State Legislature, if found repugnant to a law made by the Parliament under the Union List or Concurrent List, shall to the extent of such repugnancy, be void. (This is a rejoinder on Kiran Bedis uninformed apologetics for the flawed Odisha Lokayukta Bill 2014 by Raj Kishore Singh, an active member of Odisha Lokayukta Abhiyan, Cuttack)
Posted on: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:04:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015