PROFILE OF JUSTICE SANTOSH SANTOSH HEGDE (Downloaded from internet) Bangalore, 23 June 2010: Justice Nitte Santosh Hegde who was appointed as the Karnataka Lokayukta on 3rd August 2006 for a term of five years and has 14 months to complete his term has resigned from his post as he has been disappointed as he was not granted more authority including suo moto power to investigate corrupt officers. Successive state governments have promised to empower Lokayukta, but unified opposition from state bureaucrats and politicians has stalled any move to make the anti-corruption institution more effective. Hence, frustrated Justice Hegde decided to quit in protest. Justice Hegde who has conducted more than a 100 raids on government servants unearthing crores of rupees in hidden wealth and cash was given a public service award from Transparency International. He had said earlier that "consecutive governments have not taken the issue of corruption seriously. Amendments are in fact made to dilute law as in Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988." His team had also prepared a report on illegal mining in the state but Justice Hegde felt that the state Government was not acting in the right direction towards the report. For example, officials caught in the act for corruption cannot be convicted unless the government sanctions prosecution but the government has been left exposed by its reluctance to support the Lokayukta the best way he wants. Ramakrishna Hegde was the first chief minister in India to press for an institution like Lok Ayukta in the state in 1983. Though the Lokayukta had suo moto powers when it was established in 1986, the power was withdrawn within six months. For many years nobody knew about it until retired Supreme Court judge Nanjegowda Venkatachala, now 80, brought to the fore the anti-corruption institution when he took over as Lokayukta in 2001. Nitte Santosh Hegde is a former judge of the Supreme Court of India. He was born on 16th June 1940 at Nitte village in Udupi District. He is the son of former Speaker of Lok Sabha and justice K.S. Hegde. He had his early education at St. Aloysius School in Mangalore and Madras Christian College in Madras. He completed his intermediate examination from St. Joseph's College and BSc degree from Central College, Bangalore. He acquired law degree from Government Law College, Bangalore in 1965. After completing apprenticeship training, N. Santosh Hegde was enrolled as an advocate in January 1966 and was designated as senior advocate in May 1984. He was appointed as the Advocate General for the state of Karnataka in February 1984 and held that position till August 1988. He worked as Additional Solicitor General of the Union of India from December 1989 to November 1990. He was Re-appointed as the Solicitor General of India in 1998. N. Santosh Hegde was appointed as a Judge of Supreme Court of India in 1999. He retired as judge of Supreme Court Of India in June 2005. He was conferred Honorary Doctorate of Law degree by the Mangalore University in 2005. For a brief period he worked as Chairperson of Telecom Dispute Settlement Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. He was of the view that Telcom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) was not the authority for dispute resolution between customers and telecommunication service providers. N. Santosh hegde was appointed as Lokayukta of Karnataka State on 3rd August 2006 for a term of five years. He has expressed concern about illegal mining taking place in state of Karnataka which have deep repercussion on ecology and to exchequer of the state. As he could not get sufficient authority and power to book the corrupt politicians and officials, Justice N. Santosh Hegde reigned from his post of Lok Ayukta in the evening of on 23rd June 2010. --- On Tue, 26/4/11, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
From: M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Tuesday, 26 April, 2011, 8:18 AM
| Can some one tell us the fault of Justice Santosh Hegde and why the demand for his resignation is being made? It is not fact that the nation is proud of him for conducting raids, unearthing blacke money, tacking mining mafia, daring even the Chief Minister for the alleged charges.
--- On Mon, 25/4/11, chandra jain <ckjaininindia@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: chandra jain <ckjaininindia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Cc: parivartanindia@gmail.com, kiranbedi2005@yahoo.co.in, debasish.pramanik@gmail.com, tripathidk@yahoo.com, msisodia@gmail.com, fattechand@yahoo.com, sshanbhag_2000@yahoo.com, sankarprasadpani@gmail.com, s.anoopkumar@gmail.com
Date: Monday, 25 April, 2011, 11:24 AM
I think it is a case of severe heartburn & nothing else. This drafting committee has gathered a lot of national prestige & these five 'civil society' leaders have suddenly come under limelight. Other activists feel they should also be on some such committee. I can only remind all that these five eminent 'civil society' leaders did their homework well, they presented a specific plan of action to the society & the government, worked for its implementation & garnered huge public support. It is only a beginning - the drafting committee has to come up with an acceptable draft with all its intricacies & that bill has to go through the complete legislative process before it can become a law. Other activists can start working on their possible roles in all these subsequent activities, if they want to be associated with this particular anti-graft law only. If they have better ideas/suggestions for the Lokpal Bill, these can be sent to the drafting committee & there is a mechanism to take notice of these suggestions from the 'civil society'. I am sure that if another group works diligently on another idea, say electoral reforms or picks up something else & comes up with a clear cut plan of action & is able to gather public support, they will be able to corner equal or more
publicity & get appointed to more powerful committees. Instead of denigrating the work of these five or finding faults in their characters, let us work on other badly needed reforms. Chandra K Jain 93124 39464 INDIA
From: S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoopkumar@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Cc: parivartanindia@gmail.com; kiranbedi2005@yahoo.co.in; debasish.pramanik@gmail.com; tripathidk@yahoo.com; msisodia@gmail.com; fattechand@yahoo.com; sshanbhag_2000@yahoo.com; sankarprasadpani@gmail.com; s.anoopkumar@gmail.com
Sent: Sun, April 24, 2011 6:13:26 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!
Sorry. There is an error. The first sentence of the message should be corrected to read as - "If the civil society members in the draft committee are "biased" in
your opinion, then perhaps you have an answer as to which side they are inclined towards and what are their selfish considerations that would benefit them."
S. Anoop Kumar. ----- Original Message ----- From: "S. Anoop Kumar" <s.anoopku...@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 24, 5:03 pm
Subject: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!
To: HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005
Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,
If the civil society members in the draft committee are unbiased in
your opinion, then perhaps you have an answer as to which side they
are inclined towards and what are their selfish considerations that
would benefit them.
You are disputing the very essence of Lok Pal Bill when majority of
Indians are thinking that Lok Pal is what is required and we are
already late in having such a law in place. And majority Indians
think, wish, hope and pray that such a bill would bring in some change
in governance, responsibility and accountability in governance and
delivery mechanism.
And regarding the other alternatives to the Lok Pal Bill quoted by
you, you know for sure they are not practical and implementable and
still you suggest them. I see a day dreamer in you. It clearly
appears you are personally against a set of people and you fail to see
the good intentions of these people. And you will oppose anything
and everything these people would attempt to do. Just for the sake of
opposing. Even if they can bring in some good to the society.
Regards,
S. Anoop Kumar.
On Apr 24, 11:43 am, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment