SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Ori) 315

R.K.PATRA, P.K.MISRA
RAMA CHANDRA NAYAK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.R.SARANGI, D.Samal, G.RATH, J.M.MOHANTY, N.K.DAS

R. K. PATRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition made under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is by way of public interest litigation. The petitioner who claims to be the Editor of a daily newspaper 'bartamana Samachar' seeks to assail the validity of notification dated 25-11-1996 (Annexure-4) of the Government of Orissa in the department of Public Grievances and Pension Administration appointing Justice K. P. Mohapatra (retired) opposite party No. 4 as Lokpal, Orissa.

( 2 ) SHRI Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner, has made a two-pronged salvo to the appointment of Lokpal which are as follows : (I) Under Section 3 (1) of the Orissa Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') it is the Governor who is to appoint the Lokpal after following the due procedure laid down for the purpose, but in the instant case, it was the Chief Minister who initiated the process ultimately leading to the issuance of the impugned notification. Therefore, there was clear breach of the statutory requirement. (ii) The appointment of opposite party No. 4 as Lokpal is vitiated because of non-fulfilment of the requirements of the proviso to Section 3 of the Act in the mat









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top