Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Lokayukta cannot entertain complaints where an alternative remedy is available - Main points include that if a grievance can be addressed through proceedings before a Tribunal or Court of law, the Lokayukta is barred from investigating the matter ["Sreenivas Jayaram, S/O. Late M. Jayaram vs Principal Secretary Department Of Medical Education - Karnataka"] ["Bhiku Anna Tambe VS Ganpat Anna Tambe - Bombay"] ["Dinesh Kumar Agarwal VS State of Uttaranchal - Uttarakhand"].
Section 8(1)(b) of the Act explicitly states that the Lokayukta shall not investigate complaints involving matters for which the complainant has or had a remedy in a court or tribunal, unless the Lokayukta is satisfied that the complainant could not or cannot for sufficient cause pursue such remedy ["Bhiku Anna Tambe VS Ganpat Anna Tambe - Bombay"] ["Dinesh Kumar Agarwal VS State of Uttaranchal - Uttarakhand"] ["Sandeep Kumar Agrawal VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"].
The jurisdiction of the Lokayukta is limited to matters not already subject to judicial proceedings; it cannot override or substitute the courts' authority to decide private rights or legal disputes ["Sreenivas Jayaram, S/O. Late M. Jayaram vs Principal Secretary Department Of Medical Education - Karnataka"] ["Dinesh Kumar Agarwal VS State of Uttaranchal - Uttarakhand"].
The law emphasizes that the Lokayukta's role is investigative and quasi-judicial within its defined scope, and it cannot bypass the legal remedies available in courts or tribunals ["Additional Tahsildar VS Urmila G. - Supreme Court"] ["Catherine Dzuvichu VS Nagaland Lokayukta - Gauhati"]].
Courts have consistently held that the Lokayukta's jurisdiction is barred when a remedy before a court or tribunal exists, reinforcing that the Lokayukta cannot take up matters that are sub judice or where legal remedies are pending or available ["Sreenivas Jayaram, S/O. Late M. Jayaram vs Principal Secretary Department Of Medical Education - Karnataka"] ["CHILDREN’S ACADEMY ASSOCIATION VS LOK AYUKTA, UTTARANCHAL, DEHRADUN - Uttarakhand"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The consensus across the cited judgments and legal provisions is that the Lokayukta cannot take up matters for investigation if there is an existing remedy available before a court or tribunal. This is explicitly provided in Section 8(1)(b) of the Act and reinforced by judicial rulings that emphasize respecting the jurisdiction of courts and tribunals. Therefore, the Lokayukta's authority is limited to cases where no alternative legal remedy exists or where the complainant demonstrates that they could not or cannot pursue such remedies for sufficient cause.
In India's robust framework for combating corruption, the Lokayukta serves as a vital anti-corruption watchdog at the state level. However, its powers are not unlimited. A common query arises: Can the Lokayukta take up matters for which a remedy is available before a court of law? The answer, generally speaking, is no. This exclusion ensures judicial processes remain unhindered and prevents overlapping investigations.
This blog post delves into the legal boundaries of Lokayukta's jurisdiction, drawing from statutory provisions and judicial precedents. Note that this is general information and not specific legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
The Lokayukta or Up-Lokayukta cannot initiate or conduct investigations into matters for which a remedy is available before a court of law or other statutory tribunal. This principle is enshrined in various Lokayukta Acts across states, designed to demarcate investigative roles from adjudicatory functions. [
#Lokayukta #AntiCorruptionLaw #LegalJurisdiction
If the complaint is with regard to one’s grievance, if he has any other alternate remedy, the complainant cannot maintain complaint before the Lokayukta or Upa-Lokayukta. ... After receipt of the recommendations of the Lokayukta, the Governing Council of INU has applied its mind to the allegations made against the petitioner(s) and issued show-cause notice dated 9-7-2025, which is in accordance with law. The Court, at this stage, cannot consider the ....
any Tribunal or Court of law. ... cases and for matters connected therewith. ... Section 8(1) of the said Act provides that except as hereinafter provided, the Lokayukta or an Upa-Lokayukta shall not conduct any investigation under this Act in the case of a complaint involving a grievance in respect of any action if the complainant has or had any remedy by way of proceedings before ... The effect of this interim order is that the Co-operative Society cannot refuse to ....
Registrar, Kerala Lokayukta, Legislative Complex and others, AIR 2023 Ker 97, the Division Bench of the High Court reiterated the law laid down in Sudha Devi K. case (supra). ... For the reasons, mentioned above, in our view the order passed by the High Court as well as the Upa Lokayukta cannot be legally sustained. The same are accordingly set aside. ... by the High Court as well as Upa Lokayukta deserve to be set aside. ... Insofar as the jurisdict....
and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. ... and the only remedy available with the appellant is to question the order of the Division Bench of the High Court by filing an special leave petition in this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. ... minority institution was examined, the objection was sustainable, still that objection was turned down by this Court as referred in para 9 and held that it is the person aggrieved who has to pursue his or her remedy avai....
The Lokayukta or Upa-Lokayukta cannot ignore the policy intent and the law laid down under the Act. 25. ... An authority cannot be permitted to evade a law by shift or contrivance.” ... Furthermore, it is also a well settled proposition of law that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. In the case of State of Tamil Naidu & Others -versus- K. ... It is a settled proposition of law that what #HL_STA....
Lokayukta is merely a statutory body and hence, it cannot be invited to defend its order. ... If the impugned order of the first respondent is tested on the plane of what have been hereinabove stated, this Court has least hesitation in holding that the impugned order of the Lokayukta cannot be sustained since it has misapplied Sec.13(1)(c) of the Act to the nature of the complaint before it. ... The petitioner had therefore, approached the Lokayukta with his complaint dated 13.01.2022 ....
Though reliance has been placed on Section 36(3) of the Act, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is only the pending matters Commission. ... Under the facts and circumstances aforesaid and the discussions made, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 19-12-2019 passed by the learned Lokayukta so far as it constitutes a direction is unsustainable in law. ... However, since the challenge is structured mainly on the point of law, this Co....
The Court must adopt a construction which suppresses the mischief and advances the remedy and “to suppress subtle inventions and evasions for continuance of the mischief, and pro privato commodo, and to add force and life to the cure and remedy, according to the true intent of the makers of the Act, ... When this Court decides questions of law, its decisions are, under Art. 141, binding on all Courts within the territory of India, and so, it must be the constant endeavour and concern of this C....
Section 9 of this Act enumerates the matters the Lokayukta or the Upa-Lokayukta could investigate. And Section 10 specifies the matters that fall beyond the Institution's investigative purview. ... State of AP, (1986) 2 ALT 336, holds that Lokayukta may have followed certain procedure, which procedure is normal to an enquiry or trial in a Court of law. Even then, it cannot be said that the Lokayukta's investigation amounts to a court's adjudication i....
It is thus, evident from the settled position of law as would appear from the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court referred hereinabove, that due to lack of reason, the order cannot be said to be order in the eyes of law. ... (2) For the purpose of any such investigation (including the preliminary inquiry), the Lokayukta shall have all the powers of a civil court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act 5 of 1908), in respect of the following matters#HL_E....
“(b) if the complaint has or had any remedy by way of proceedings before any Tribunal or Court of Law: Provided that the Lokayukta may conduct an investigation notwithstanding that the complainant had or has such a remedy if he is satisfied that such person could not or cannot for sufficient cause have recourse to such remedy.” Section 8 deals with the Matters not subject to investigation, which is quoted herein-below:- “(1) Except as hereinafter provided, the Lokayukta shall not conduct any investigation under this Act in the case of complaint involving a grievance in respect of any action-....
In opinion of this Court, the Lokayukta is free to follow its own procedure which are in fact provided under the provisions of the Lokayukta Act and the Rules and Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as a whole would not apply stricto senso to the proceedings before the Lokayukta under the provisions of the Lokayukta Act. The legislature in its wisdom has provided for certain powers which are provided in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the same is not illustrative, but definite. Over and above the powers which are vested in Lokayukta under Section 11 of the Lokayukta Act, th....
8. It will be relevant to quote Section 7 of the aforesaid Act, is as follows:- (i) Except as herein after provided, the Lokayukta shall not conduct any investigation under this Act in the case of complaint involving a grievance in respect of any action – (a) If such action relate to any matter specified in the Third Schedule; or (b) If the complaint has or had any remedy by way of proceedings before any tribunal or court of law: Provided that the Lokayukta may conduct an investigation notwithstanding that the complaint had or has such a remedy if he is satisfied that such person c....
Provided that nothing in sub clause (ii) shall prevent the Lokayukta or an Up lokayukta from conducting an investigation if he is satisfied that such person could not or cannot, for sufficient cause, have recourse to a remedy referred to in that sub clause. (II) if the complainant has or had any remedy by way of proceeding before any Tribunal or Court of law : (2) The Lokayukta or an Up-Lokayukta shall not investigate any action,- (a) in respect of which a formal and public inquiry has been ordered under the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 (Central Act 37 of 1850), by....
(b) in respect of a matter which has been referred for inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (Central Act 60 of 1952), by the Government of India or by the State Government. (2) The Lokayukta or an Up-Lokayukta shall not investigate any action(a) in respect of which a formal and public inquiry has been ordered under the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 (Central Act 37 of 1850), by the Government of India or by the State Governmet)t; or (ii) if the complainant has or had any remedy by way of proceeding In our opinion, the Lokayukta has no right to decide private r....
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
