#Lokayukta jurisdiction

Karnataka High Court clarifies that Section 8(1)(b) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, bars re-investigation of grievances rooted in private disputes, reinforcing that revenue entries are presumptive and not conclusive of title. The ruling underscores the limited jurisdiction of the Lokayukta in adjudicating civil disputes, directing aggrieved parties to civil courts instead.

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that a public servant who forges documents to manipulate land mutation entries commits serious service misconduct, making Lokayukta proceedings valid despite the availability of civil remedies under the Land Revenue Act. This clarifies that administrative integrity trumps procedural alternatives when public trust is breached through fraud, directly impacting village accountants and revenue officials across Karnataka.

The Gauhati High Court has ruled that while the Lokayukta may investigate corruption in public appointments, it lacks the power to declare such appointments void without issuing notice or providing a hearing. This upholds Article 311(2) and Rule 9(1) of the Nagaland Services Rules, ensuring that even alleged corrupt appointees are entitled to procedural fairness before termination. The decision reinforces that investigative bodies cannot act as adjudicators without following established service law safeguards.