Supreme Court appoints new Lok Ayukta for Uttar Pradesh; disappointed over “lack of consensus”

In a verdict that surprised many, the Supreme Court today set aside its earlier order of appointing Virendra Singh as Lok Ayukta for Uttar Pradesh and appointed another retired judge as the new Lok Ayukta for the state..Justice Sanjay Mishra, who has served previously on the bench of the Allahabad High Court will now serve as the Lok Ayukta for Uttar Pradesh..The judgment delivered by a Bench comprising of Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice PC Pant made it clear that the Court was ‘disappointed over the differences between constitutional functionaries over such a simple issue’..Justice Gogoi also said,.“We can only wish that the reservations of the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court could have been placed before us, prior to our previous order.”.The aforesaid observation dates back to the order passed by a Bench headed by Gogoi which had on December 16, proceeded to appoint one of the three persons (in the zone of consideration)– Justice Virendra Singh – agreeable to the CM and the Opposition leader as the Lok Ayukta..However, this appointment was shrouded in controversy when Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court DY Chandrachud had strongly objected to Singh’s appointment and conveyed the same to Governor Ram Naik, while highlighting the fact that Singh’s name had been included in the panel of names sent to the Apex Court without consulting Chandrachud and ignoring his objections..Close on the heels of this development, a writ petition was filed by a journalist, Sachidanand Gupta in the Supreme Court challenging the controversial appointment and the state government had agreed to defer the oath taking of Singh after a vacation Bench had heard this petition..Before the Vacation Bench, Senior Advocate TR Andhyarujina, appeared for the Allahabad High Court and had argued that the UP government had misled the Supreme Court into believing that Virendra Singh’s name was not objected to by the Allahabad Chief Justice..The Court had said that even if that submission was accepted, the Court is not inclined to vacate its order since the Constitutional functionaries in the State were given adequate time to carry out the order of the court but failed. The Bench had then noted that,.“If we find Virendra Singh not to be suitable, we will recall that order. But we are not sending the matter back to be decided by the State functionaries.”