Supreme Court Reverses Lokayukta Appointment in Uttar Pradesh Due to Procedural Lapses

The case of Sachchidanand Gupta v. State of U.P. & Ors. revolves around the appointment of the Lokayukta in Uttar Pradesh. The controversy arose when the Supreme Court appointed Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.) as the Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh. However, later proceedings revealed that there were misrepresentations in the selection process, leading the Court to recall its earlier order and appoint Justice Sanjay Misra instead.

Background of the Case

The petitioner, Sachchidanand Gupta, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, challenging the appointment of Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.) as the Lokayukta. The petition claimed that the State of Uttar Pradesh had misled the Supreme Court into issuing the appointment order.

The issue stemmed from previous directions issued by the Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 301 of 2015, where the Supreme Court had instructed the State to appoint a new Lokayukta within a specified timeframe. However, delays and disagreements among constitutional functionaries resulted in the Supreme Court stepping in to appoint Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.).

Key Arguments by the Petitioner

• The petitioner argued that the Supreme Court was misled by the State into appointing Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.).
• It was claimed that the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court had expressed reservations about Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.), but this was not disclosed to the Supreme Court.
• Due to this lack of transparency, the petitioner sought the removal of Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.) and the appointment of a new Lokayukta.

Key Arguments by the Respondents

• The State of Uttar Pradesh contended that Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.) was a suitable candidate for the position.
• The respondents emphasized that three names, including Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.), had received the concurrence of the Chief Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.
• They argued that the selection was made in accordance with the law and the Supreme Court’s previous orders.

Supreme Court Judgment

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C. Pant, examined the facts and found discrepancies in the appointment process. The key observations were:

• The Chief Justice of the High Court had raised objections to Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.)’s appointment, but this was not properly disclosed to the Court.
• The State of Uttar Pradesh had presented a list of names, but there was no clear consensus among the key constitutional functionaries.
• Given the procedural lapses and lack of unanimity, the Supreme Court held that its earlier order appointing Justice Virendra Singh (Retd.) had been issued under misrepresented facts.
• The Court recalled its appointment order and instead appointed Justice Sanjay Misra as the Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh.

Conclusion

This judgment underscores the importance of procedural integrity in high-level appointments. The Supreme Court exercised its authority to rectify an erroneous appointment, ensuring transparency and adherence to constitutional principles in the selection of the Lokayukta.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Sachchidanand Gupta vs State of U.P. & Ors. Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 28-01-2016.pdf