Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH, MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
Bhupesh Chaudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
1. Heard Mr. P. N. Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 and Mr. J. C. Lalnunsanga, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 3.
2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the provisions of Section 3 and 19 of the Mizoram Lokayukta Act, 2014 inserted by Mizoram Lokayukta (Amendment) Act, 2016; for setting aside and quashing the provision of Section 22 of the Mizoram Lokayukta Act, 2014; for setting aside and quashing the proceeding being Case No. MLC No. 34/2021 pending before the Mizoram Lokayukta and all the proceedings following therefrom and for writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to act any further on the basis of the preliminary inquiry, submitted by the Anti Corruption Bureau. At the outset, it is relevant to take note of that the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the Mizoram Lokayukta (Amendment) Act, 2016 had not yet been notified as required under Section 1 (3) of the Mizoram Lokayukta (Amen
The Mizoram Lokayukta can initiate proceedings based on a Preliminary Enquiry Report, and the petitioner is entitled to receive the report for an adequate opportunity to respond.
Compliance with statutory procedures is mandatory; failure to adhere to outlined procedures vitiates legal proceedings and investigations.
Natural Justice – Aim to rule of natural justice is to secure justice – These rules can operate only in areas not covered by any law validly made.
The court ruled that a preliminary inquiry does not require prior notice to a public servant and that the Lok Ayukta can proceed without forwarding a copy of the complaint unless a formal investigati....
The Lokayukta is a necessary party in proceedings under the Meghalaya Lokayukta Act, 2014, affirming its quasi-judicial role.
The Lokayukta was barred from conducting a preliminary enquiry on the complaint of overstay in service under Section 9(1)(a) and Clause-(d) to the Second Schedule of the Act.
The court emphasized the importance of following the procedural requirements outlined in the Odisha Lokayukta Act, particularly regarding the authority for preliminary inquiry and the timing of expre....
Point of law : Report of the Upa-lokayuktha cannot be said to be without jurisdiction and the report made therein by itself does not affect any legal right on the petitioner therein. The action of th....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Lokayukta in directing investigations and the role of the Superintendent of Police in conducting the investigation on behalf o....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
