Ombudsman can't be given HC judge status -- Kerala HC

Ombudsman can't be given HC judge status -- Kerala HC
PRESS TRUST OF INDIA

SEPT 6: The Kerala High Court today struck down as unconstitutional a controversial provision in the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, which confers the status of High Court judges on all seven members of an ombudsman panel constituted to go into complaints against local bodies.

A division bench, comprising Chief Justice A V Savant and Justice K S Radhakrishnan, struck down the provision in Sec. 217-G(9) of the act while delivering a judgement on two petitions challenging the constitutional validity of some of the recent amendments to the Act dealing with the ombudsmen, the term of office and conditions of service of ombudsmen.

The petitioners had contended that conferring such status on all members was contrary to Art.217 and 221 of the Constitution dealing with the appointment and conditions of service of High Court judges, as the state legislature, they argued, lacked competence to confer it.

The bench observed that it was not possible to confer the status of a judge of the High Court or Supreme Court on personnel belonging to other fora without first seeking the views of the Chief Justice of India.

On a query by the Court, Advocate General M K Damodaran said the Chief Justice's views were not sought at any time.

The situation needed to be remedied immediately, the bench held and said it was for the legislature to bring in appropriate legislation to that effect.

The petitioner -- Samatha Law Society, Kochi, and Thoppil Sreekumar of Consumer Aid, Kollam, had also challenged the provision which extended the same conditions applicable for removal of a high court judge to the removal of ombudsmen. They had contended that it was arbitrary and against Art 14 of the Constitution.

However, the bench accepted the clarification made by the Advocate General M K Damodaran in this regard. He said the provision would only be applied in the case of a high court judge being the member of the ombudsmen panel.

For others, suitable legislation would be brought to provide for the procedure which would be similar to the one prescribed under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

On the petitioners' contention that appointment of seven members as ombudsman was `wholly unnecessary' the bench held that this was not a matter for the court to decide and it was for the legislature to take a decision in this regard.

The Dr Satya Brata Sen committee, constituted by the Government to study the aspect of decentralisation of powers, had submitted a detailed report regarding the composition of the ombudsmen panel, the court pointed out.

The bench also rejected the contention that the independence of the judiciary would be adversly affected if high court judges accept appointment as chairman of the ombudsmen panel.