By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, Oct 5: The High Court of Meghalaya on Thursday refused to interfere with a June 13 of the Meghalaya Lokayukta rejecting a complaint by Mendipathar MLA, Marthon J Sangma.
His complaint was rejected by the application of Section 53 of the Meghalaya Lokayukta Act of 2014, which mandates that the Lokayukta shall not inquire or investigate any complaint if it is made after the expiry of seven years from the date of which the offence mentioned in such a complaint is alleged to have been committed.
Sangma was aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the chairperson of the Meghalaya Lokayukta.
S Deb, the MLA’s counsel, contented that the constitution of the Meghalaya Lokayukta was notified on May 15, 2019. As such, the petitioner (Sangma) had no recourse to avail of the Lokayukta’s service for the offence alleged to have occurred in 2014.
The complaint before the Lokayukta was well within seven years from the date of its establishment and the impugned order is thus “bad in law and liable to be interfered with” by the high court, the counsel submitted.
S. Jindal, the counsel for the respondents, refuted the submission of the petitioner by drawing the attention of the court to Section 53, which he said does not permit the entertainment of any complaint made seven years after the date of occurrence.
It was further submitted that the provisions of the Limitation Act will have no application as the Meghalaya Lokayukta is a special statute, which does not provide for any condonation.
The court of Justice HS Thangkhiew heard the counsels for both parties and examined the materials on record. The complaint, filed by way of an additional affidavit, was also examined.
The complaint was on alleged irregularities in the implementation of different schemes under SRWP 2012-2013 and against the then block development officer, who allegedly had fraudulently released Rs 11.75,000 lakh without following the due process of the law.
“A perusal of the complaint clearly reflects that the offence had occurred in 2012-2013,” the court said, underlining the provisions of Section 53 of the Meghalaya Lokayukta Act.
This section states: “The Lokayukta shall not inquire or investigate into any complaint if the complaint is made after the expiry of a period of seven years from the date of which the offence mentioned in such complaint is alleged to have been committed.”
It was also noted the Meghalaya Lokayukta Act, 2014 is a special statute and the provisions thereof, do not provide for the application of the Limitation Act.
“The Meghalaya Lokayukta Act, 2014, therefore, having not provided for the application of the Limitation Act, and the complaint being hopelessly delayed, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned order, and this writ petition accordingly stands dismissed,” the court said.