Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea For CAG Report On Complaints Regarding Award Of Arunachal Pradesh Contracts

The Supreme Court on Friday (November 23) refused to entertain a plea seeking directions to the CAG to provide a status report on complaints that government contracts in Arunachal Pradesh were being awarded to family members of the then Chief Minister during 2007-2011 without tender process.

A bench of Justice Bela Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Kumar allowed the petitioner to withdraw the plea and pursue appropriate remedy in appropriate forum.

“1. After arguing for some time and on our expressing reservation in entertaining the present M.A., the learned counsel, Mr. Prashant Bhushan for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw the present application, with a view to file appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum, as may be permissible under the law. 2. Permission to withdraw M.A. is granted. 3. The Miscellaneous Application is dismissed as withdrawn”, the Court stated.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan for the applicant Voluntary Arunachal Sena argued that the Court's earlier order in a PIL had directed the CAG to examine the complaints, but no action had been taken in the past eight months. He sought the Court's intervention to require the CAG to provide a status report.

Justice Trivedi clarified that the earlier order was not a direction but an expectation, as the petitioner had filed a separate case regarding subsequent contracts. She said that the Court had not directed the CAG to submit reports.

“It was not a direction; it was an expectation. We have purposefully not given any direction because you had filed an independent petition about subsequent contracts. We have not asked CAG to give any reports etc”, she said.

Bhushan responded that without any response from the CAG, the order was meaningless. He informed the Court that despite sending two letters to the CAG, there had been no reply.

“Then the order doesn't mean anything. What is the point if the CAG sleeps on it for eight months despite the fact that your lordships has asked them to examine at the earliest? I wrote to them two letters. You lordships may ask the CAG to give a status report. If this direction has to have any meaning the minimum that is required is the CAG to at least inform the court. Otherwise what can I do”

Bhushan expressed concern that this situation effectively amounted to the dismissal of the PIL petition, which was not what the Court had intended.

“Then the order doesn't mean anything. It effectively amounts to dismissal of my petition which was not what the court had done”, he said.

However, Justice Trivedi told Bhushan to withdraw the application and pursue appropriate legal proceedings or follow up directly with the CAG.

The Court granted the request and recorded in its order that the Miscellaneous Application was dismissed as withdrawn, allowing the applicant to pursue remedies permissible under the law.

Background

The issue arose from a PIL filed in 2010 by Voluntary Arunachal Senaa, alleging corruption in the awarding of government contracts in Arunachal Pradesh during 2007-2011. The petitioners accused the state government of granting contracts without tenders to close relatives of then-Chief Minister Dorjee Khandu. The petitioner had also added the incumbent Chief Minister Pema Khandu (son of Dorjee Khandu) as an additional respondent in his personal capacity later.

In October 2023, the Court sought a response from the CAG on two key questions: whether close relatives of the Executive Head of the State could be awarded government contracts and the norms governing such awards. Thereafter, in March 2024, the Court directed the CAG to examine the complaints.

Case no. – Miscellaneous Application Diary No. 36488/2024

Case Title – Voluntary Arunachal Sena v. State of Arunachal Pradesh