THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK
Ranchi, Oct. 7: The investigation into the “illegal” appointment of over 500 employees by the Jharkhand Assembly made between 2005 to 2007 has run into an unseemly controversy and a tussle with the Judiciary.
The Jharkhand High Court, hearing a PIL filed by Shiv Shankar Sharma, has directed the Assembly secretary at least four times so far to produce the report, submitted by late Justice Vikramaditya Prasad in 2018 after probing the appointments. Irked with the non-compliance of its order, the court, on October 4, warned the Assembly secretary to face criminal contempt proceedings if he did not submit it by October 12.
“We see that the report is deliberately not produced before us even though Her Excellency the then Governor of the State (read Droupadi Murmu, now President) has directed the Speaker of Vidhan Sabha to carry out the proposals given in the report. So, we consider it to be an obstruction to justice and direct the Secretary of Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha to produce the aforesaid report of late Justice Vikramaditya Prasad’s Commission within seven days, hence, failing which we would be constrained to initiate a criminal contempt for obstruction to justice,” the court observed.
Incidentally, the Assembly has said that the report of Justice Vikramaditya Prasad Commission is currently with the Commission headed by Justice SJ Mukhopadhyay, a retired Supreme Court judge. Therefore, it could not be submitted. On this, the court said that after taking the investigation report from SJ Mukhopadhyay Commission, it should be presented in the court.
Now, the problem. Who will obtain the report from the Commission and submit it to the high court? So, every time, the high court demanded the report, the Assembly secretary wrote it to the cabinet coordination department, requesting it to make the report available after obtaining it from the commission on the grounds that the Assembly is not the appointing authority of the commission. It was the State government that had constituted the commission and not the assembly. In this sequence, the secretary has again written to the cabinet coordination department after the court’s order on October 4 to make the report available.
According to sources, the cabinet coordination department, in turn, replied that the issue involved the Assembly secretariat. Moreover, the Commission’s office is in the Assembly premises, so he should directly obtain it from the Commission.
Notably, the State government had constituted Justice Mukhopadhyay commission in the light of the Advocate General’s opinion, sought by the Assembly speaker. Its mandate is to examine the legal issues that may crop up if the Assembly acts on the report of the late Vikramaditya Prasad commission, which is said to have made adverse comments on the role of three successive speakers and several assembly officers. The Assembly even compulsorily retired two joint secretaries-Ram Sagar and Ravindra Singh-in 2018 after the commission report came. The reason given for action against them was that they were involved in a conspiracy for illegal appointments. So, it was obvious that the Vikramaditya report had raised a big question mark on the appointments under scanner.
According to sources, the process of all these appointments was initiated during the tenure of Inder Singh Namdhari and completed when Alamgir Alam was the speaker. Alam’s successor Satyanand Bhokta gave out-of-turn promotions to several such employees.
The case
Shiv Shankar Sharma has filed a public interest litigation in this matter. It has been said in the petition that there were irregularities in the appointments made in the Assembly between 2005 and 2007.
During the tenure of Alamgir Alam, a CD involving the issue of money transactions had come to the fore. The then Governor Syed Sibte Razi had ordered an inquiry. Retired Justice Loknath Prasad first conducted the investigation, and then Retired Justice Vikramaditya Prasad got the responsibility for the investigation. In the year 2018, Justice Vikramaditya submitted the investigation report to the then Governor Droupadi Murmu (currently the President).
The report accuses Namdhari, Alam, and several officials of irregularities, nepotism and favouritism in appointments in the assembly during their tenures. It also says that the appointments were more than the number required.
Murmu sent the inquiry report to the Legislative Assembly for action. “She had also recommended a CBI probe into the CD episode, but no action has been taken yet,” said Sharma’s lawyer Rajiv Kumar.
