Lokayukta raps govt for ‘protecting privileged’

NT NETWORK

Panaji

State Lokayukta Justice P K Misra has written a special report to Governor Satya Pal Malik accusing the state government of ‘protecting the privileged and the powerful’ by not accepting its order passed in connection with the alleged ‘corruption and criminal conspiracy’ regarding illegal renewal of 88 mining leases between November 2014 and January 2015.

Taking a potshot at the state government, the Lokayukta suggested that the three accused – former chief minister Laxmikant Parsekar, former Mines secretary Pawan Kumar Sain and former director of mining and geology department Prasanna Acharya – be ‘honoured’ on Independence Day for showing remarkable efficiency in renewal of mine leases.

The Lokayukta has asked the Governor to place this report before the Legislative Assembly of Goa as per section 16(4) and section 16(5) of the Act.

The Lokayukta maintained that the opinion sought from Advocate General, on whose basis the Lokayukta report was rejected by the government, seems to be based on misconception, half-baked ideas, incomplete and cursory reading of the Goa Lokayukta Act. He said the government did not bother to read the report of the Lokayukta carefully.

The state Lokayukta had on January 20 ordered the state government under section 17 of the Act to register FIR against the three and hand over the case to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for an independent inquiry into their conspired role for illegal renewal of 88 mining leases in 2015 which was allegedly done to avoid competitive bidding or the auction process of granting leases.

However, the personnel department later filed the action taken report informing the Lokayukta that competent authorities – state Governor and the Chief Minister – have denied the sanction for registering FIR against former chief minister Laxmikant Parsekar and the two other officers and entrusting the inquiry to CBI.

Dissatisfied with the reasons given in action taken report, the Lokayukta made a hard-hitting analysis in his 11-page special report to the Governor stating that the non-acceptance of the report is on expected lines, given the usual attitude of protecting

the privileged and the powerful without discerning the relevant materials in their proper perspective.

It further questioned as to why public exchequer should be depleted by establishing institutions like Lokayukta and Human Rights Commission if their reports are to be routinely rejected without bestowing the attention their reports deserve. It added that mere registration of an FIR does not amount to initiation of prosecution. “There is no law or any decision of the Supreme Court which says that before registration of any FIR sanction is required,” the Lokayukta stated in the report.

The Lokayukta noted that prosecution can be said to be initiated only when a charge sheet as contemplated in section 173(8) of the CrPC is filed before the court by the concerned police officer.

Justice Misra expressed his resentment over regular misinterpretation of the provisions of the Act and stated that various reports of Lokayukta are routinely being thrown to the dustbin by various authorities, as if such reports are of mere minion. He said section 17 provides that if Lokayukta is satisfied that the public functionary has committed a criminal offence then ‘order’ to the effect may be passed to initiate prosecution against the public functionary concerned. However, the provision is treated as recommendation by the authorities.

Pointing out that 31 files were cleared in a single day without examining compliance and violations on January 12, 2015, the day on which the ordinance was issued, Lokayukta said, “If the above acts were not “abuse of position” then God only knows the meaning of such expression. And God alone can save the state,” he quipped.

“Only a Dhritarashtra and or Gandhari would be unable to perceive anything sinister in what happened on January 12, 2015, and it seems there is no dearth of Dhritarashtra or Gandhari or even Shakuni these days in Mera Bharat Mahan,” he exclaimed.

The anti-corruption ombudsman suggested a need for institutional integrity for a good administrator, arguing that personal honesty is not enough. “We need not shout from the roof tops regarding eradication of corruption, while paying lip service when the question of actual eradication of corruption crops up,” he reiterated.