Gujarat government continued to raise additional grounds in the special leave petition filed by it against the Gujarat high court order upholding the Lokayukta appointment by the governor.
On the eve of the Supreme Court hearing of the case, the Gujarat government on Monday continued to raise additional grounds in the special leave petition filed by it against the Gujarat high court order upholding the Lokayukta appointment by the governor.
Two separate applications, filed on September 14 and October 8, mention various technical grounds on why the appointment of Justice RA Mehta by the governor should be treated as illegal. The advocate representing the state government is EC Agrawala.
“The government had fulfilled the entire process of consultation as per Gujarat Lokayukta Act and hence the appointment of Justice RA Mehta does not have any legal sanctity,” the application filed on Monday said.
It stated that, on request of the CM, the chief justice had recommended four names. On March 22, 2010 the CM accepted the proposal with regard to Justice JR Vora. After this, the leader of opposition who was called for consultation declined to meet the CM. The council of ministers approved the name of Justice Vora on April 1, 2010 as Lokayukta and the matter was submitted to the governor for approval.
On advice from the attorney general of India, the governor rejected the proposal. It said that the government maintains that process of appointment and consultation came to an end on March 31, 2010 and therefore there in no sanctity in the eye of law for appointment of Justice RA Mehta.
Earlier, on September 14, Gujarat government filed a separate affidavit which elaborated on reasons why the chief minister is against the appointment of Justice Mehta. It said that looking at his age he may not be able to handle the arduous nature of the responsibilities. It also said that he may be biased owing to his association with NGOs and social activist groups.
In January, a day after Gujarat high court upheld the appointment of Lokayukta, the Gujarat government moved the Supreme Court seeking to set aside the judgment on the ground that the governor did not follow the constitutional procedure of consultation with the council of ministers.
){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}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}