7/27/2019 Letter of Justice R. A. Mehta.

1/7

6"' August 20 13Your Excel lency, the Govern or of Guj3rat , Dr . Smt. Kam laj i , a n dHon'ble the Chief Justice of Gujarat , Mr. Ju st ice Bhaskar Bhattacl iarya,

1. I am thankful for putting confidence in me for the high office of theGujarat Loltayukta.

2. When Hon'ble the then Chief Jus t ice Mr. Jus t ice S J Mukhopadhyaykindly invited me two years ago for my consent for this purpose, anddiscussed, I was not interested, having no ambition or desire, and wasreluctant, being averse t~ any controversy. W ith kindness and great persuasionI was given to understand that the choice would be unan imou s and without anyobjection from any quarter including the State Government. I had my ownreason to believe that ( i t has turned out to be wrong) and I had consented atsome personal sacrifice thinking that I could serve very useful public purposeand having a hope that the Gujarat Loltayukta Act, 1986, could be upgradedand made really effective and strong in line with universal public opinion andconsensus in the cozn try.

3. Soon it became clear that the public functionaries (whose conduct theLokayukta may have ro investigate) had s trong objections against myappointment as the Gujarat Lokay ukta. I t wa s said that I had 'anti-governmentbias' . 'Fr om that r r ~o ~n en t have been b rood ing : To be or not to be th eLoknj~rrktcr?Th e answer has not been easy.

4. Highly respected elders and friends have with great force andpersuasion suggested that I must accept. My thinking is to the contrary. I ow e,

Page 1 of 7

7/27/2019 Letter of Justice R. A. Mehta.

2/7

5. Th ey have given various reasons, such as,Highe st judicial authority in the State (the Chief Justice) and the

constitutional authority (the Governor) have reposed faith in me.The highest caul-ts in the State and in the country have upheld

the appointment and repeatedly negatived all contentions (includingthat o f bias) against my appointment a s the L okayukta.There is acute need of such Lokayukta in Gujarat as in all the

States.There has been no Lokayukta in ~ u j a i a t ince almost a decade.

e A lot of awareness and public expectations are generated fromt h e ' ~ o k a ~ u k t and it should not be frustrated.

Forty-five of crores of public money is sa id to have been s p e ~ tby the Gujarat Government in this litigation. Humongouslydispropo rtionate figure by any standa rd.

I ma y be called hyper-sensitive, touchy , timid, shirking and whatnot. Some may even allege that I have been won over, purchased,threatened and wh at not!

6. I nave very great respect for their views. I have been seriouslyconsidering all along, but I could not persuade myself to accept the office ofLokayukta.

7. The mind-set and attitude displayed by the State Government arecounter-significant, e.g.;

P "not acceptab le to me", "my way o r highway";9 T he draft O rdinance, during the pendency of the petit ion, to amend

the sche me o f the appointment of Lokayukta ( to exclude the ChiefJustice and load the selection com mittee w ith m ajority of the rulingparty and giving primacy to the political executive); (Not assentedto by the Governor).

9 Referring a large number of co m pl ai nt s against the publicfunctionaries to a Commission of Inquiry (so as to exclude themfro111being investigated by the Lokayu kta);

Page 2 of 7- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

7/27/2019 Letter of Justice R. A. Mehta.

3/7

P Persistently an d tenaciously approaching the Supreme C'o111.t S!,I',Review Petition, and Curative Petition) at huge public expense. Itmay be compared to the budget for the' L,ok;~yukt;l of fic e or c v c n 01'the High Court (which deals with lacs of cases every year). Itwould be an eye-opener.

> The new 1,oltayiil;ta Bill passed by t h e Giijarat LegislativeAssem bly (ag ain to exclude the Chief Justice and load the selectioncomm ittee with majority of the ruling party and giving primacy tothe political executive); (Not assented to by the G overnor).

); Even afier three judgements of the Supreme Coi~rt , he reluctanceof the State Go ve r~ lm en t o notify the Loltayukta appointment inthe official Gujarat Government Gazette is surprising but notunexpected.

> Th e lettel- of the Gujarat Governm ent dated July 26, 2013(delivered slt my Ahmedabad residence while I was in USA) doesnot indicate any invitation or interest by the Government. It statesthat " the Hon'ble Governor of Gujarat has appointed you as theLoltayukta . . . Th e swe aring in ceremo ny for the purpose needs tobe organized at the Raj Bhavan . . . to enable you to assume theoffice." As if the G overnmen t has no interest or role in the m atter!N o invitation and no notification by the gove rnm ent!

8. I humbly believe that the high office of Lokayukta and its occupant(wlio is expected to inquire into the complaints against high pubicfu nc tio ~- xie s ncluding the Chief M inister) are entitled to utmost respect,dignity and grace to enable thein to function effectively and perform the greatpublic duty and to carry public credibility of the institution. When powerfulelements do not care to maintain that effectiveness and credibility, theinstitution an d its occ upa nt suffer in their credib ility, effecti vene ss and utility.

Page 3 of 7

7/27/2019 Letter of Justice R. A. Mehta.

4/7

9. May be there is a lesson for the new Lo1;pal 6r. L o k a y ~ ~ l ~ t f li!ls 1: )consider whether and to what extent the public f~nctionarieswho are potentia!subjects of inquiry, should have a n y voice in thc4;election a n d appointment.Giving 5 voice and pr i~ nac y o suc h publ ic f'unctionaries to decide who is to betheir investigator, would give an impression that they want it to be their 'cagedparrot' and the institution of the Lokayukta would lose all credibility andrespect of the people and de ter many judge s from acc epting.

10. I am r e m i~ d e d f the fa lnous Transfer of Judges Case of Just iceS I4 Sheth during the Emergency. When the specially constituted full bench ofG ~ ~ j a r a tigh Court started the hearing; the Central Government raised aquestion: Whether the Hon'ble Judges would like to hear the case or reclzwethelnselves (as they had already expressed an opinion against the transfer)?Th e judges asked to approach the C hief Justice wh o had constituted the specia!full bench for hearing this mom entous case.

When the Chief Justice (who was also a transferee) was approachedwith a galaxy of counsels, he shot back i~lstantly:f tlze .Government has noconjidence itt tile judges, wind u p th e s l ~ o w .Within minutes, evelyone wasout of the CJ chamber and the matter proceeded. I was present as the JuniorStanding Counsel for the Central Go vernment.

11. I am averse to any controversy and try to keep away. Thepresent controversy has denigrated the office of the Loltayukta and adverselyaffected its credibility. The appoin tmen t has lost all the grace and dignity. T heobjection alleging anti-govt bias (thou gh negatived by the courts), really hurts.Some.think that that if a person is not pro-government, he is necessarily anti-government. They can't accept that there is third category, neither pro nor anti,b u t independent and neutral. Their mind set is clear - heir way or no otherway.

7/27/2019 Letter of Justice R. A. Mehta.

5/7

12. The office of Lolcayukta is a lot dependent on the co-operationand support o f the governm ent for the infrastructure, proper and ad equate staff,independent investigators, budget etc for its effective functioning. I hadinqi~i~.edrom th e gov ernm ent abou t the infi-astl-ucture, stall; budget ctc o l'th eLokayultta. I was given one page sanctioned set ~ ! p f s taff of 9 aze t tec lofficers (most of them vacant) and 18 non- gazetted persons (including !Class IV). Th e current and next budget estimates were not given.

13. If the Loltayukta has to depend on the reluctant non-cooperativegovernment for all infrastructure, staff, budget etc, and to beg or fight for it, itis not in my nature. In this scenario the Loltayukta will not able to finctioneffectively an d to f ~ ~ l f i l lhe high public expectations.

14. A lot of public awareness is generated about corruption ofpublic functionaries. Allegations are widely made. In absence of anyindependent credible investigation, the allegations m ay lingsr and stick. Manyeminent public spirited and honest people are averse to becoming publicfunctionaries in such climate of public life. An independent Lokayukta canclear & protect such people, and expose the ones found involved in wrongdoing.

15. I had consented under a belief (proved w rong ) that the invitationto be Loltayultta wo uld be w ithout any dissent and con troversy.

16. I am grateful to the judiciary that the allegation o f bias isrejected, but the psychological sting remain s.

17. For effective functioning and for satisfying the great publicexpectation of cleansing public life, the office of Lokayukta is required to betreated and accepted with due grace, dignity and respect and free from anycontroversy, anti with whole-hearted support. In fact it should be a commoncause between the Lokayukta and the government (distinct from the publicfunctionaries) as seen from the legislative intent. Unfortunate ly this cause does

Page 5 of 7 e,.- - --- -- -- - - - - ---+A:---- ---------

7/27/2019 Letter of Justice R. A. Mehta.

6/7

not appear to be shared by the government. A Lokayukta unwartec! by th egovernment cannot get al l the necessary and t imely support and cooperetionfrom the reluctant government. The Lokayukta will be rendered ineffective,and the great public expectations would be frustrated; and I would be at thereceiving end for being ineffective and failure.

18. I franlcly admit that I will not be able to fulfill the pubiic duty,public need and high public expectation from the Lokayukta in thecir.cumstances. How can I take the responsibil i ty and become the Lokayuktawhen my objectivity and credibil ity are not accepted by the governm ent and bythe public functionaries whose conduct the Lokayukta may have toinvestigate? Findings and recommendations - for or against a publicfunctionary- wil l alwa ys be unde r question mark.

19. While of fending so many very good, wel l -meaning and highlyrespected elders and friends, I feel greatly rel ieved and feel free to d o what Il ike and sup port the social causes I share. I take as compliment the al legationof so-called 'b ias7 of being 'ant i-government ' because o f my suppor t to suchsocial causes. If there is perceived injustice to vulnerable people at the handsof the p,overnment, I sympathise with them, try, in a small way, to serve,support and help their causes. A judge should h ave such sensit ivity for justiceand that doe s no t mak e him biased and he doe s not lose his objectivity and heremains true to his oath to do just ice without fear or favour. I derivesatisfaction from such sensit ivi ty and such work. Every human being shouldhave such heart and feelings, more part icularly those who have to renderjustice.

20. I humbly wi thdraw my consent for the appointment as theGujarat Loltayulita and decline to assume the off ice. Kindly accept myrccluest and relieve m e.

Page 6 of 7

7/27/2019 Letter of Justice R. A. Mehta.

7/7

21. I sinccscly wish io bc csciisctl hy : i l l I iv (h is : ~ ~ l l i - c l i ~ ~ ~ : ~ sI I I ~great psblic inconvenience and embarrassment. I genuinely wish I could haveavoided tha t .

22. I hope that i:l fiitiire the judiciary \vould decline to participate inr eco~nrnendingor accepling any suck1 appointment (it should originate fi-cnljudiciary) if it is subject to overruling by the public functionaries whoseconduct/misconduct could be the matter of investigation by him. There is clearconflict of interest of public functionaries and the appointee may get anundeserving labei o f 'caged parrot ' .

23. I a m not sure whether I am right in declining the appointment asthe Lokayukta. GL;v,c1-With highest personal regards,L

Mo st s incerely,

(R k Mehta)