The Supreme Court Thursday paved the way for a probe by the Odisha vigilance department against BJD MLA Pradeep Kumar Panigrahy into a complaint which alleged he amassed assets disproportionate to his legal sources of income.
Observing that the high court has committed “a manifest error”, a bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M Trivedi set aside its verdict of February 3, 2021.
The Orissa High Court had quashed the December 11, 2020 order passed by the state Lokayukta ordering a preliminary vigilance inquiry on a complaint by Ranjan Kumar Das, a deputy superintendent of Police of the vigilance cell, against the Biju Janata Dal MLA.
The state anti-graft ombudsman had ordered the Directorate of Vigilance, Cuttack to conduct a preliminary inquiry against Panigrahy, the MLA from Gopalpur constituency, and submit a report to the Lokayukta.
The high court set aside the order of the ombudsman asking the vigilance department to probe the MLA without hearing the other side and later a plea of the Lokayukta seeking a review of the decision was also dismissed by a “non-speaking order” (without assigning detailed reasons).
“The aim of the rule of natural justice is to secure justice or to put it negatively, these rules can operate only in areas not covered by any law validly made. The concept of natural justice, indeed, has undergone a change with the passage of time, but still the timetested rules, namely, are (i) no one shall be a judge in his own case (Nemo debet essse judex propria causa) and (ii) no decision shall be given against a party without affording him a reasonable opportunity of hearing …,” the apex court said.
“In the first instance, the Division Bench of the High Court has committed a manifest error in passing of the order impugned..,” the judgement said, adding it was “in violation of the principles of natural justice”.
Allowing the appeal of ombudsman, the bench, in its judgement, said it was of considered view that there was no element of bias in conducting a preliminary inquiry in the instant case and overruled the objection raised by the lawmaker.
It also rejected the submission that the Lokayukta had no locus to move the top court challenging the high court orders.
“Consequently, the appeals (of Lokayukta) succeed and are accordingly allowed. The Judgment of the High Court dated 3 rd February, 2021 and the review order dated 5th April, 2021 are hereby set aside,” it ordered.
