Confidential annual document submitted to governor highlights corruption watchdog's plight.
Does Maharashtra really need a Lokayukta? Perhaps not. A confidential annual report of the Lokayukta, submitted to the governor last Saturday, underscores how the corruption watchdog has been rendered powerless by powerful politicians and bureaucrats.
Most recommendations made by the Lokayukta to prosecute corrupt government employees are never taken seriously by the government, forcing the institution to send reminders and then submitting "special reports" to the governor seeking attention, stated the report viewed by the dna. The confidential report mentioned "special reports" under section 12 (5) were sent to the governor in 154 cases, informing him about the government's non-compliance. It, however, hardly helped. This is obvious from the fact that the Lokayukta's annual reports have not been tabled in the legislature after 2011. Not surprising that the institution now seeks permission to make its report public immediately after submission to the governor.
In cases where the government was forced to take action following repeated reminders of the ombudsman, the action was too little and too late, serving neither as punishment for the accused nor as deterrent for others. "In many cases, it was observed that charge sheets were served to employees at the fag end of their service or on the date of retirement. Then the employees were placed under suspension. Departmental inquiries, however, don't commence since inquiry officers are not appointed, and in some cases, inquiry officers are changed from time to time," stated the report, adding that in many cases, the employees even died before the departmental inquiry could be completed.
The report highlighted the need for a strict deadline for departmental inquiries, adding that such delays affected pension benefits as "many times, the retired employee dies before completion of the inquiry". The report further mentioned, "It is imperative that the government established a regular in-house monitoring mechanism for such delayed departmental inquires and ensured that orders were passed by appropriate authority in time."
While the 700-page annual report gave a detailed description of corruption cases disposed off by the body in 2014, the first few chapters of it gave interesting insight into the happenings within the watchdog – how powerless the body is sans investigating and prosecuting power and how it has been made toothless, as it has to rely on the government to probe serious cases against its own employees and politicians.
Referring to previous reports, and reference of states such as Karnataka, MP and UP, the Maharashtra's ombudsman has reiterated its long pending demand that the police and ACB must be brought under them so that the institution could be made "effective". The watchdog has also sought "financial autonomy" from the government. "The Godbole committee's report of 2001 states that the institution completed 25 years, but its impact on the public life in Maharashtra has been minimal. The absence of an independent investigating agency, inadequate staff affects the functioning of this institution. Lokayukta in Karnataka, MP, Chhattisgarh, AP, UP have independent investigative agencies. Hence, entrusting the Lokayukta with overall responsibilities of overseeing the vigilance work in state, putting DG, ACB under the institution is needed," the report added.
The body has also demanded that their recommendations to sanction prosecution must be treated as "mandatory" and cited staff crunch owing to expansion of jurisdiction. Such a sorry state of the ombudsman was surprising.
Maharashtra was the first state to enact the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upalokayuktas Act 1971. The institution came into effect on October 25, 1972 headed by chief justice SP Kotwal. Over 903 cases were received in the very first year by the watchdog. Nearly 43 years down the line, the institution receives over 6,000 fresh plaints annually. That is when the institution doesn't have a website of its own.
It was 1966 when the concept of Lokpal was discussed in India for the first time. The credit goes to the Administrative Reforms Commission which recommended an institution of ombudsman on lines of Scandinavian countries.
There was a public outcry against corruption in the country, existence of widespread inefficiency and unresponsiveness of administration to attend to public complaints in the country which was set-free from British rules barely 18 years ago.
Top five districts in terms of cases (Jan to Dec 2014)
Mumbai City 288
Mumbai Suburbs 444
Thane 469
Nagpur 376
Pune 373
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Mantralaya")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}