Supreme Court Restores Odisha Lokayukta's Probe Order Against Pradeep Kumar Panigrahi MLA

A Bench comprising Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Bela M. Trivedi passed the said order in a petition filed by the Office of the Odisha Lokayukta challenging the order of the Division Bench of the High Court to set aside the preliminary inquiry, and the order affirming the same passed in review.

Factual Background

On 09.12.2020, the Odisha Lokayukta received a complaint from Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Cell Unit, Bhubaneswar indicating the alleged corruption against Dr. Pradeep Kumar Panigraphi. On 11.12.2020, it passed an order directing the Director of Vigilance, Odisha, Cuttack to conduct a preliminary inquiry in exercise of power under Section 20(1) of the Odisha Lokayukta Act, 2014. A report was also sought within a period of two months. The order was challenged by Panigrahi before the Orissa High Court. It appears that though Odisha Lokayukta was impleaded as a party, no notice was issued to it. The High Court allowed the petition and set aside the order directing preliminary inquiry. Lokayukta filed a review which was dismissed.

Analysis by the Supreme Court

The Court noted the High Court had overlooked that Section 20(1) of the 2014 Act empowers the Lokayukta to conduct preliminary inquiry against a public servant through its inquiry wing or ‘any agency’ to determine if there exists a prima facie case. As per Section 25, ‘any agency’ would include State Vigilance and Crime Branch. Under Section 28, the Lokayukta is empowered to avail the service of any officer or organisation or investigation agency of the Government. The Court did not find any legal infirmity in Lokayukta’s direction to the Director of Vigilance, Odisha, Cuttack to conduct a preliminary inquiry.

The Lokayukta had proceeded with further inquiry after the Supreme Court granted stay of the operation of the High Court’s order. The Court noted that it does not appreciate the action of the Lokayukta, but observes that no justification has been provided by Panigrahi to suggest that the action taken is not in conformity with law.

The Court also did not find merit in the argument that the action of conducting the preliminary inquiry was biased since the Deputy Superintendent of Police of the Directorate of Vigilance has submitted a complaint; Director of Vigilance was directed to conduct preliminary inquiry and the inquiry was conducted by senior officer of Directorate of Vigilance. It was of the view that the Deputy Superintendent was merely an informant and not the person interested; the inquiry was conducted by a different officer and therefore the allegation of bias would not hold its ground.

The Court was not inclined to accept the contention that the Lokayukta has no locus standi to file the appeal before it. It noted that being the aggrieved party it has the locus standi to assail the order of the Division Bench by filing a Special Leave Petition.

Case details

Office of the Odisha Lokayukta v. Dr. Pradeep Kumar Panigrahi And Ors.| SLP(Civil) No. 6261-6262 of 2021| LiveLaw 2023 (SC) 135  |23rd February, 2023| Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Bela M. Trivedi

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ravindra Shrivastava, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Pitamber Acharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Apoorve Karol, Adv. Mr. Lakshay Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mithu Jain, AOR Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR

Odisha Lokayukta Act, 2014 - Section 20(1)- No infirmity in Lokayukta’s direction to the Director of Vigilance, Odisha, Cuttack to conduct a preliminary inquiry - Supreme Court sets aside Orissa HC order which set aside Lok Ayukta direction