A single Bench of Karnataka High Court headed by Justice M Nagaprasanna, rejected petition which was headed by Karnataka Lokayuktha. In its order, the Court held that recommendations made by Lokayukta for imposing any penalty on the Government Officials does not take away the power of the disciplinary authority to impose a lesser penalty on the official.

The Court rejected the petition filed by Karnataka Lokayuktha in which they are challenging an orders dated 06.09.2021 by which the second respondent was imposed a penalty.

In its judgement, the Court said that the powers of the disciplinary authority cannot be taken away merely because a recommendation is made by the Lokayukta for imposition of partaicular penalty.

Case Brief:

In this matter, (Karnataka Lokayuktha and State of Karnataka & ANR, the accused, Chandrashekhar alleged for accepting and receiving a bribe of Rs.700, in the year 2009. Later, he was acquitted on the ground that there was no work pending with him, for him to demand or accept a bribe.

At the same time t,he report was prepared under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 seeking entrustment of departmental enquiry to the Lokayukta under Rule 14A of the Karnataka Civil Services (CCA) Rules. 

After an enquiry conducted by the Lokayukta observed that the allegations made on the second respondent was proved and they recommending imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement from service against him.

The Counsel member of the Lokayukta submitted that “Once the recommendation is made, the reduction of penalty can only happen in accordance with law. There are no reasons indicated as to why the penalty against the second respondent is reduced to that of reversion from what was recommended.”

On the Contrary, the Central Government opposed and said that Lokayukta cannot be considered to be an aggrieved person against the orders passed by the disciplinary authority imposing a particular penalty.

The court made reference to judgement passed in which it was held that Lokayuktha has no locus to challenge the decision of the Cabinet. Thus it had dismissed the petition filed by the Lokayuktha.

Advocate Venkatesh S. Arbatti was the main counsel of the Petitioner and AGA M. Vinod Kumar, was the Counsel member of the Respondent.