Kochi, March 31 – The Kerala High Court on Tuesday upheld the constitutional validity of the 2024 amendments to the Kerala Lokayukta Act, providing significant relief to the state government while also introducing a key safeguard on decision-making timelines.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V.M. Syam Kumar dismissed petitions led by senior Congress MLA Ramesh Chennithala, who had challenged the amendments as unconstitutional and violating the principle of separation of powers.
While upholding the amendments, the court ruled that if the competent authority fails to act on a Lokayukta report within three months (90 days), it would be deemed to have accepted it.
The Bench clarified that this interpretation must be read into Section 12 of the Act, which deals with the submission of reports and follow-up action.
The amendments, introduced by the second Pinarayi Vijayan government, had triggered widespread debate as they curtailed the Lokayukta’s powers, particularly its authority to recommend the removal of public officials found guilty of corruption.
Critics argued that the changes reduced the anti-corruption body to a recommendatory institution.
Chennithala’s petition pointed to key changes in Sections 2, 3, and 14 of the Act. Notably, the authority to decide on recommendations against the Chief Minister was shifted from the Governor to the State Legislative Assembly, while the Speaker was made the competent authority in cases involving MLAs.
The petitioner contended that this effectively vested appellate powers in the ruling establishment.
Furthermore, the amendment to Section 3 diluted the eligibility criteria for the appointment of the Lokayukta by allowing former High Court judges, instead of mandating a former Chief Justice.
Changes to Section 14 also enabled competent authorities to disregard Lokayukta recommendations without mandatory action.
However, the court rejected arguments that the amendments encroached upon judicial powers.
The state government maintained that the Lokayukta is not a judicial body and that investigative agencies cannot be vested with final adjudicatory authority.
The ruling comes against the backdrop of past confrontations, including the resignation of the then Minister K.T. Jaleel following a Lokayukta order in 2021, and subsequent scrutiny of the Chief Minister’s Distress Relief Fund, developments that marked a shift in the government’s stance on the institution.