Back
Seeks Answers From Over Widespread Allegations Of Severe Maladministration
The has intervened in the ongoing controversy regarding the governance of the Union Territory of Lakshadweep, directing the administration to respond to a series of serious allegations. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. heard the (PIL) filed by Mohammed Muslim Khan P.P., which challenged the current administrative structure and the alleged functioning of local authorities.
The Governance Dispute
The core of the dispute centers on the absence of a permanent, full-time administrator for the islands. The petitioner contended that the current arrangement, where the Administrator of Daman and Diu holds additional charge of Lakshadweep, has led to a vacuum in leadership. This, the petitioner alleges, has emboldened a bureaucracy that operates without adequate oversight, resulting in policy decisions detrimental to the residents' welfare.
Allegations of Maladministration
The petition highlights a broad spectrum of grievances, ranging from the demolition of educational infrastructure—which has allegedly forced students into overcrowded facilities—to the closure of vital industrial units run by the These closures have contributed to rising unemployment. Furthermore, the petition points to public health crises, including shortages of medicine at the , and an ban on construction that has stalled development. The petitioner also raised concerns over the introduction of liquor sales in a culturally sensitive region, alongside allegations of neglect in the agricultural and veterinary sectors.
Arguments and Legal Positioning
During the proceedings, the Additional Solicitor General of India, representing the Union, argued that the appointment of an Administrator is a matter of and is beyond the scope of .
The court distinguished between the constitutional authority of the President to appoint an official and the actual performance of that official’s office. While conceding that it could not interfere with the appointment process, the bench emphasized that the administration’s actions were subject to .
Key Observations
The bench expressed deep concern regarding the state of administration on the islands:
- “Why this adhoc administrator? Why can't you have a proper administrator, who can take all decisions?”
- “While the decision of the Hon’ble President to entrust the additional charge to the Administrator cannot be questioned in a , the other allegations relating to the conduct and functioning of the Administrator in the administration of Lakshadweep call for an .”
- “The other thing is school, which is a matter which may require some consideration.”
Court’s Decision and Future Outlook
The High Court has formally ordered the respondents, including the and the Home Secretary, to file a detailed responding to the allegations within two weeks. The court underscored that the conduct of the bureaucracy and the current state of public services require a formal explanation. By refusing to dismiss the petition entirely, the court has set a firm expectation for administrative transparency. The matter is currently posted for further hearing on , where the adequacy of the administration's response will determine the next steps in this high-stakes oversight of island governance.
