[1]

ABSTRACT
“The existing devices for checks on elected and administrative officials
have not been effective as the growing instances of corruption cases suggest.
The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is designed to inquire into
allegations of corruption by administrative officials only but cannot punish the
guilty The CBI, the premier investigating agency of the country, functions
under the supervision of the Ministry of Personnel, public grievances and
pensions (under the Prime Minister) and is therefore not immune from political
pressure during investigation it can be said,―the CVC is independent but does
not have powers while CBI has power but is not independent‖. As a result the
first cannot punish while the latter cannot investigate fairly.
All these have necessitated the creation of an independent and high
powered Lokpal with its own investigation team. Unfortunately for last four
decades, no effective act or institution was developed. As a result, a nation-wide
movement could take place with the leadership of a Gandhian social activist.
Most importantly, this was the time when the nation witnessed many corruption
cases at various level and the intervention of media has helped in taking to its
heights and made it national movement. Hence, while analysing the historical
perspectives of Lokpal, this study would attempt to answer the most pertinent
question whether the mainstream media or social media helped in giving shape
for a huge movement. Secondly this study will also find out the nature of
media‘s contribution for establishing an effective Lokpal in India.”
 [2]

Introduction
1
Ombudsman means a delegate, agent, officer or commissioner. Gender
defines ombudsman as “an officer of parliament, having as his primary
function, the duty of acting as an agent for parliament, for the purpose of
safeguarding the citizen against abuse or misuse of administrative power by the
executive “. Administrative law provides for control over the administration by
an outside agency, strong enough to prevent injustice to the individual, at the
same time leaving the administration adequate freedom to enable it to carry on
effective government. In every progressive system of administration, there is a
need for a mechanism for handling grievances against administrative fault.
Thus, ombudsman is one of such machinery one can find in today’s time.

The parliamentary and judicial control on the administrative action is

very week, except there is a statutory provision for an administrative tribunal.
There is no means for handling grievances against misconduct, inefficiency,
delay, negligence, etc. against the officials. The natural remedy open to the
aggrieved person, in such cases, is for him to persuade the minister if he is
accessible to the aggrieved person, or to draw his attention by raising a question
in parliament to which he is responsible. but in practice it is difficult. even the
parliamentary remedy is also not adequate. It was felt necessary to have
alternative or additional institution to control wrong decision,
maladministration, or corruption of public officials. the ombudsman is one such
principal alternative provided for.

A 2005 study conducted by Transparency International in India found

2

that more than 62% of Indians had first-hand experience of paying bribes or
influence peddling to get jobs done in public offices successfully. In its 2008
study, Transparency International reports about 40% of Indians had first-hand
experience of paying bribes or using a contact to get a job done in public office.
In 2012 India was ranked 94th out of 176 countries in Transparency
International’s Corruption Perceptions Index. The basic idea of the Lok Pal is
borrowed from the office of ombudsman, which has played an effective role in
checking corruption and wrong-doing in Scandinavian and other nations. A
Lokpal is a proposed ombudsman (Legal Representative) in India. The word is
derived from the Sanskrit word “lok” (people) and “pala” (protector/caretaker).

1
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/ombudsman.asp, Key Highlights- What Is an Ombudsman?
2
Centre for Media Studies, India Corruption Study 2005: To Improve Governance: Volume I – Key Highlights, New Delhi:
Transparency International India, 30 June 2005.
 [3]

DEFINITION OF THE TERM “OMBUDSMAN”

The term “Ombudsman” is Scandinavian, meaning something in the

nature of “entrusted person” or “grievance representative”. The part word
“man” is taken directly from the Swedish (the old Norse word was
“umbodhsmadr”) and does not connote any necessity that the holder be of the
male gender. Indeed, if one was to survey the present Ombudsman community
worldwide, it would be seen that there are many women Ombudsman. My
tracing of the office will start with the Scandinavian “grievance person” since
this model is said to set a standard. I do acknowledge, however, that there are
several precedents from Asian (and other) settings of people, in former times,
undertaking office to provide relief and redress to citizens adversely affected by
government action.

In earlier times it is also recorded that the Romans installed an officer

called the “tribune” to protect the interests and rights of the plebeians from the
patricians. There are also writings in both China and India, which suggest that
three thousand and more years ago, special officials were designated to function
in the manner of Ombudsmen. In China during the Yu and Sun dynasties it was
the duty of the incumbent, who was called the “control yuan”, to “report the
voice of the people to the Emperor and to announce the Emperor’s decrees to
the people”. In India today there are Ombudsmen appointed in twelve of the
Indian states, though not at Federal level. The term for them is “Lokayukta”, an
ancient word revived so as to make it meaningful in a local sense in that
country.

In 1809 Sweden appointed an official entitled the “justitie ombudsman”

to enquire into actions of the government administration, including the military,
and the courts. The establishment of this office was said to be a reaction to state
absolutism and an assertion of individual rights and dignities of the citizen.
Nearly 100 years later, Finland appointed a similar person and Denmark
followed likewise in 1954.

The Ombudsman Committee of the International Bar Association has

described the office thus:

“An Office provided for by the Constitution or by action of the

Legislature or Parliament and headed by an independent, high-level public
official, who is responsible to the Legislature or Parliament, who receives
complaints from aggrieved persons against Government agencies, officials and
employees, or who acts on [his] own motion, and who has the power to
investigate, recommend corrective action, and issue reports.”
 [4]

This contemporary definition of the term “Ombudsman” is not agreed to

universally, but it does serve as a starting point in defining the role.

NATURE OF OMBUDSMAN

With the spread of ombudsman concept and its utility, several surrogate
institutions have emerged in the private sector, which claim the title of
ombudsman. Some scholars drew distinction between, “classical” ombudsman
and other kinds of “quasi” or “executive ombudsman”. However, Gellhorn
made clear distinction between classical and other agencies performing the
ombudsman function. Professor Larry B Hill has enumerated the following
characteristics of the pure ombudsman:

1. It is an institution to protect individuals from the injustice done to them by any

of the three main organs of the government.
2. It is independent of the three organs of state. In other words, it is an
independent body and, once instituted, neither of the organs of government has
any control over it. Every man has free access to it.
3. This is a great advantage and the citizen can get prompt relief or remedy to his
grievances.
4. The Ombudsman has power to collect facts taking initiative and can decide the
matter. On the other hand, the courts cannot do this.
5. If the issue or problem is placed before it, then only can it take up the case.
This special role of the Ombudsman is of great importance and a critic
remembering this write “The Ombudsman is primarily the people’s
investigator, guide and defender”.
6. Viewed from this perspective we want to say that the system of ombudsman
possesses immense importance. It is an important mile-stone in the vast field of
citizen-administration relationship.
7. Established as separate entity that is functionally autonomous.
8. Operationally independent of both the legislature and the executive.
9. Ombudsman is a legally established governmental official.
10.A monitoring specialist.
11.Administrative expert and professional.
12.Non-partisan.
13.Normatively universalistic.
14.Client-centered, but not anti-administration.
15.Popularly accessible and visible.
16.High status institutions
 [5]

17.Have extensive resources to perform his mission.

CASE LAW:

3
In Chandra Bansi Singh vs. State of Bihar it was held that:
“It is not eccentric to conclude that if there is more administration, there will be
more maladministration”. The greater the power given to the executive, the
greater the need to safeguard the citizen against its arbitrary or unfair exercise.
Therefore, an urgent problem of the day is to evolve an adequate and effective
mechanism to contain these dangers by controlling the administration in
exercising its powers, safeguarding individual rights, and creating procedures
for redressal of individual grievances against the administration.

4
In Barium Chemicals Ltd vs. Company Law Boards it was held that:
The court’s reluctance or inability to look into departmental files remains a
major hindrance in the way of challenging an administrative action at the
present moment and this saps the efficacy and vitality of judicial review to a
considerable extent. Further, in writ petitions, which is the most common
technique of challenging administrative action, the courts mostly go by the
affidavits filed by the parties concerned. They do not usually call for oral
testimony or permit cross-examination or the persons filing affidavits.

5
In G. Sadanandan vs. State of Kerala, the supreme court of India told that it
must be kept in mind :
“Continuous exercise of the very wide powers conferred by the rules on the
several authorities is likely to make the conscience of the said authorities
insensitive, if not blunt, to the paramount requirement of the Constitution that
even during the emergency, the freedom of Indian citizens cannot be taken
away without the existence of the justifying necessity specified by the (Defence
of India) Rules themselves. The tendency to treat these matters in a somewhat
casual and cavalier manner which may conceivably result from the continuous
use of such unfettered powers, may ultimately pose a serious threat to the basic
values on which the democratic way of life in this country is founded.”

3
3 AIR 1984 SC 1767 : (1984) 4 SCC 316.
4
AIR 1967 SC 295: 1966 Supp SCR 311.
5
AIR 1966 SC 1925
 [6]

OMBUDSMAN’S JURISDICTION

As everybody is well aware, it is very difficult for an ombudsman to satisfy all

expectations of all the members of public who have disputes with government
administration.

‘The office should be legally established, functionally autonomous, external to

the administration, operationally independent of both the executive and
legislature, specialist, expert and non-partisan, normatively universalistic,
client-centered but not anti-administration, and both popularly accessible and
visible.’

The Ombudsman is granted wide powers such as to enter and inspect premises,
to require anyone to produce documents or furnish information, to summon and
examine under oath anyone possessed of relevant information, to conduct
hearings and must give notice of the investigation when it is required to do so.

If maladministration is discovered, the Ombudsman can recommend but not

order a governmental official to remedy the wrong. An Ombudsman can report
bureaucratic abuses to the legislature, which may then take remedial steps.

Generally, the Ombudsman is not accountable to any external authority. If the

parties involved dissatisfied with Ombudsman’s decision, their complaint may
seek judicial review, though it rarely succeeds. Judges do not normally overturn
decisions of Ombudsman but can require the Ombudsman to reconsider a
decision.

This section of the Ombudsman Act 1979 mainly focuses on the investigation
procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman is obligated to
report the details found against government authority. The Supreme Court of
Canada has adopted a “pragmatic and functional” approach to determining the
level of scrutiny a court should exercise when reviewing the decision of a
statutory decision-maker.

However, the Ombudsman scheme is only a poor substitute for administrative

courts. The Ombudsman is clearly not a judge, so it is necessary to determine
the extent to which Ombudsman may legitimately be compared because, on one
hand, it will not help further development of public law in a country.
 [7]

On the other hand, day by day, more and more cases have been referred to the
office of Ombudsman. The Ombudsman lacks the statutory powers and can only
make recommendations because Ombudsman does not have the power to
initiate legal proceedings or prosecution on the grounds of a complaint.

6
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF OMBUDSMAN

(1) An important function of Ombudsman is to protect the rights and

freedoms of citizens and needless to say that primarily for this purpose the post
of ombudsman was instituted. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there
were autocracies in many European states and even the bureaucracies were
indifferent to people’s freedom. This appalling situation inspired freedom-
loving men to find out a solution and ombudsman was the consequence.

(2) In the Scandinavian countries, the ombudsman has another function.

The ombudsman shall have the power to supervise the general civil
administration. On this point, the duty of ombudsman is closely connected with
the public administration. Because of the protection of freedom, execution of
policies and another fall within the jurisdiction of public administration and
whether these are properly performed or not that requires to be examined-and
ombudsman does this job.

(3) In many states, Ombudsman or institution like this supervises the

general administration. It is also called general surveillance of the functioning
of the government. This is a very important function. Particularly in the
Scandinavian states the Ombudsman or person of this type performs this
function. In these countries, the Ombudsman has been found to undertake tour
for inspection.

(4) In some countries, the Ombudsman enjoys enormous power. For

example, in Sweden, the Ombudsman has been empowered to investigate the
cases of corruption (in any form) not only against the government officers but
also against the judges of the highest court! But the supervising power of
Ombudsman over the judges does not erode the independence of the judiciary.
The judges are prosecuted or fined for corruption, negligence of duties, or delay
in delivering judgement.

6
https://www.adda247.com/upsc-exam/powers-and-functions-of-ombudsman/ continued…
 [8]

(5) In the UK the Parliamentary Commissioner (British type of

Ombudsman) also acts as a Health Commissioner. In 1974 the British
parliament enacted a law to enhance the jurisdiction of Parliamentary
Commissioner to the level of local government. The local councillors can lodge
complaints against the local body and can seek redressal of grievances.

(6) An important function of Ombudsman is the exercise of discretionary

powers. The discretionary powers are really vast and how to use these powers
depend upon the person concerned. Discretionary powers include corruption,
negligence, inefficiency, misbehaviour etc.

(7) Aiming to safeguard people’s fundamental liberties.

(8) Order any official or employee of the Government or of any

subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, or of any government-owned or
controlled corporation with an original charter, to do and accelerate the
performance of any act or duty required by law, or to stop, prevent, and correct
any abuse or impropriety in the performance of such responsibilities.

(9) Having the authority to oversee the government at large. In this

respect, ombudsman work is intrinsically linked to government service.

(10) Tell the relevant person to discipline a public servant who has
broken the law by failing to do something required of them or by doing
something wrong when they should have.

(11) The authority to probe allegations of corruption (of any kind) against
all high court judges as well as government officials at all levels.

(12) Authority to make independent decisions. The scope of discretionary

authority is extremely large, and its exercise is left to the individual.
 [9]

Lok Pal- An Indian Aspect

The Indian Lokpal is synonymous to the institution of Ombudsman existing

in the Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland, Denmark etc). The office of
the Ombudsman originated in Sweden in 1809 and has been adopted by many
nations. The Swedish word Ombudsman means ―a procurator or agent of civil
affairs which may be interpreted as ―the people advocate‖. Ombudsman is a
government official who investigates citizen‘s complaints against the
administrative and judicial action. Though appointed by the legislature he is an
independent functionary – independent of all three organs of the state, but
reports to the legislature. The Ombudsman can act both on the basis of
complaints made by citizens or suo moto-that is, on his own initiative. He can
look into allegations of corruption as well as maladministration.7

Lokayuktas in State
Even after a lapse of so many years nothing has been done substantially at
the central level for implementing the institution of Lokpal. But at the state
level, many states have adopted this institution in the name of Lokayukta. There
are as many as 17 states where the institution of Lokayukta has been
constituted, beginning with Orissa in 1971. However, the power, functions of
jurisdiction of Lakayuktas are not uniform in the country. In some state, it has
been applicable to the entire elected representative including CM. on the
contrary, in some other state legislators have been deliberately kept out of his
7
C. Rowat Donald, The Ombudsman: Citizen's Defender, 1965. Pp. 348, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
 [10]

purview. Lokayuktas have not been provided with their independent

investigating machinery making them dependent on the government agencies.
As a result there lies enough scope for the politicians and the bureaucrats to
tinker with the process of investigation.

Rationale for an Institution – Lok Pal

The mechanisms available in the regular process of government, are
inadequate to check corruption in administrative department, for example, and
any decision of an official can be appealed to a higher official all the way up to
the head of a department. However this mechanism has inherent flaws. Though
officers enjoy departmental fraternity with those against whom complaints are
made, and both sail the same boat. Therefore their impartiality in judging
appeals is always doubted. On the legislative side, an individual can approach
the member representing his constituency for his demands but given the absence
of easy access of an ordinary to his representative, this has more remained a
myth than reality. Other than this politics is now ridden with nepotism and
favouritism, criminals have easy access to legislature, political corruption is
mounting this is more dangerous than bureaucratic corruption.

Among the organs of state, the judiciary has proved itself to have highest
credibility in protecting individual right. However, due to procedural
complexities involved in the court cases– right from the filing a case to the
delivery of final verdict – there are inevitable delays of justice, which often are
considered as denial of justice. The existing devices for checks on elected and
administrative officials have not been effective as the growing instances of
corruption cases suggest. The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is designed
to inquire into allegations of corruption by administrative officials only but
cannot punish the guilty The CBI ,the premier investigating agency of the
 [11]

country, functions under the supervision of the Ministry of Personnel, public

grievances and pensions (under the Prime Minister) and is therefore not immune
from political pressure during investigation it can be said, the CVC is
independent but does not have powers while CBI has power but is not
independent‖. As a result the first cannot punish while the latter cannot
investigate fairly. All these have necessitated the creation of an independent and
high powered Lokpal with its own investigation team.

Historical Aspects

After independence when increasing practice of corruption,

maladministration and misuse of authority and resource couldn’t be curbed by
existing measures under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Prevention of
Corruption Act,1988, need for an agency independent of the executive,
legislative and judiciary, to look into citizens’ grievances and cases of
corruption have been widely felt. 8

The Lokpal Bill provides for constitution of the Lokpal as an independent

body to enquire into cases of corruption against public functionaries, with a
mechanism for filing complaints and conducting inquiries etc. Dr. L.M. Singhvi 9

moved a resolution in the Lok Sabha on 3 April 1964, reiterating his demand for
setting up an officer of Parliament known as People’s Procurator. The resolution
was discussed in detail by all sections of the House but was withdrawn on the
assurance of the Government that it would look into the matter. In pursuance of
this assurance, the Government constituted a Special Consultative Group of
Members of Parliament on administrative reforms, in early 1965, which
favoured a high powered inquiry commission on administrative reforms.
Accordingly, an Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) was appointed
in January 1966, for making recommendations on their organization of the

8
Triloknath Mishra, Lokpal in India-An Analysis, 2011
9
Second Administrative Reforms Commission: Twelfthreport, February, 2009, pg. no. 3
 [12]

administrative system of the country.10 First Administrative Reforms

Commission in its report submitted in 1966 suggested that:

“The special circumstances relating to our country can be fully met by

providing for two special institutions for their dress of citizens’
grievances. There should be one authority dealing with complaints
against the administrative acts of Ministers or Secretaries to the
government at the centre and in the states. There should be another
authority in each state and at the centre for dealing with complaints
against the administrative acts of other officials. The setting up of these
authorities should not, however, be taken to be a complete answer tithe
problem of redress of citizens’ grievances. They only provide the ultimate
set-up for such redress as has not been available through the normal
departmental or governmental machinery and do not absolve the
department from fulfilling its obligations to the citizen for administering
its affairs without generating, as far as possible, any legitimate sense of
grievance. Thus, the administration itself must play the major role in
reducing the area of grievances and providing remedies where necessary
and feasible. When this machinery (in-built departmental machinery)
functions effectively, the number of cases which will have to go to an
authority outside the Ministry or the Department should be comparatively
small in number”11

The ARC while preparing its report had three ends in view:

10
Triloknath Mishra, Lokpal in India-An Analysis, 2011
11
Administrative Reforms Commission Report submittedin 1966: Quoted from Para 6
 [13]

i. Evolution of a suitable grievance procedure for the individuals to

invoke in complaints of maladministration;
ii. Creation of a mechanism which would reduce corruption in the
administrative services; and
iii. Setting up a mechanism which would take cognizance of complaints
of favouritism and nepotism against Central and State Ministers.12
Lokpal Bill
The Lokpal Bill was for the first time presented by Mr. Shanti Bhushan
during the fourth Lok Sabha in 1968, and was passed there in 1969. However,
while it was pending in the Rajya Sabha, the Lok Sabha was dissolved, and so
the bill was not passed at that time. Subsequently, Lokpal bills were introduced
in 1971, 1977, 1985 (again by Ashoke Kumar Sen when serving as Law
Minister in the Rajiv Gandhi cabinet), 1989, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2005 and in
2008, yet they were never passed. Each time, after the bill was introduced to the
13

house, it was referred to some committee for improvements a joint committee of

parliament, or a departmental standing committee of the Home Ministry and
before the government could take a final stand on the issue, the house was
dissolved again. 14

In 2002, the report of the National Commission to Review the Working of

the Constitution urged that the Constitution should provide for the appointment
of the Lok Pal and Lokayuktas in the states but suggested that the Prime
Minister should be kept out of the purview of the authority. In 2004, the UPA
government’s National Common Minimum Programme promised that the Lok
Pal Bill would be enacted. The Second Administrative Commission, formed in
15

2005, also recommended that the office of the Lok Pal be established without
delay. In January 2011, the government formed a Group of Ministers, chaired

12
Interim Report of the Administrative Reforms Commission on Problems of Citizen’s Grievances, 1966, p.8-15.
13
Source: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/002200804051550.htm
14
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lokpal
15
National Common Minimum Programme of the Government of India, May 2004
Source: http://pib.nic.in/archieve/upareport/upa_3_year_highlights.pdf)
 [14]

by Shri Pranab Mukherjee to suggest measures to tackle corruption, including

examination of the proposal of a Lok Pal Bill. 16

Jan Lokpal Bill “India Against Corruption”.

The Jan Lokpal Bill or the Citizen’s Ombudsman Bill is a draft
anticorruption bill drawn up by prominent civil society activists, seeking the
appointment of a Jan Lokpal, an independent body that would investigate
corruption cases, complete the investigation within one year and conduct trials
for the case within the next year.

Drafted by Justice Santosh Hegde, a former Supreme Court Judge and

former Lokayukta of Karnataka, Prashant Bhushan, a Supreme Court Lawyer
and Arvind Kejriwal, an RTI activist, the draft Bill envisaged a system in which
a corrupt person found guilty would go to jail within two years of the complaint
being made and his ill-gotten wealth confiscated. It also sought power for the
Jan Lokpal to prosecute politicians and bureaucrats without requiring
government permission.

Retired IPS officer Kiran Bedi and others, like Anna Hazare, Swami
Agnivesh, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, and Mallika Sarabhai are also members of the
movement, called “India Against Corruption”. Its website describes the
movement as “an expression of collective anger of people of India against
corruption.” It goes on to state: “We have all come together to
force/request/persuade/pressurize the Government to enact the Jan Lokpal Bill.
We feel that if this Bill were enacted it would create an effective deterrence
against corruption.”

16
“GoM on Corruption to Firm up Lok Pal Bill at the Earliest, Outlook, January 21, 2011.
 [15]

Anna Hazare, an anticorruption crusader, began a fast unto death, demanding

that this bill, drafted by Civil Society, be adopted. The website of the India
Against Corruption movement calls the Lokpal Bill of the government an
“eyewash”, and hosts a critique of that government bill. It also lists the
difference between the bills drafted by the government and civil society.

[A] Features of the Jan Lokpal Bill

Lokpal and its role 17

The bill proposes to establish autonomous and independent institutions

called Lokpal at the central level and Lokayukta for states. These shall have
powers of superintendence and direction for holding a preliminary inquiry,
causing an investigation to be made and prosecution of offences in respect of
complaints under any law for the prevention of corruption.

Structure 18

The Lokpal will consist of a chairperson and a maximum of eight members

of which fifty percent shall be judicial members. Fifty percent of members shall
be from amongst Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST) and Other
Backward Classes (OBC), minorities and women. It has an inquiry wing for
conducting the preliminary inquiry and a separate independent prosecution
wing. Officers of the Lokpal will include the secretary, director of prosecution,
director of inquiry and other officers.

Process of selection 19

The selection of chairperson and members of Lokpal shall be through a

selection committee The Selection Committee shall comprise of the Prime
Minister, Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Leaders of the Opposition in both houses, a
Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister, one sitting judge of
the Supreme Court, and one sitting Chief Justice of the High Court’s both
nominated by the Chief Justice of India, an eminent jurist nominated by the

17
Anil Dharker, The Topiwala Camera, The Outlook, New Delhi, 2011
18
Ibid
19
Ibid
 [16]

central government and a person of eminence in public life with knowledge of

public administration, policy making, anticorruption policy, vigilance and
finance.

Jurisdiction 20

Prime minister has been brought under the purview of the Lokpal with
specific exclusions. Lokpal cannot hold any inquiry against the prime minister if
allegations relate to international relations, external and internal security of the
country, public order, atomic energy and space. Any decision of Lokpal to
initiate preliminary inquiry or investigation against prime minister shall be
taken only by the full bench with a 3/4th majority. Such proceedings shall be
held in camera. Its jurisdiction to include all categories of public servants
including Group ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ officers and employees of government.
On complaints referred by Lokpal, the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)
will send its report in respect of Group ‘A’ and ‘B’ officers back to Lokpal for
further decision. With respect to Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ employees, the CVC will
proceed further in exercise of its own powers under the CVC act subject to
reporting and review by Lokpal. All entities receiving donations from foreign
sources in the context of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) in
excess of Rs.10 lakh per year are brought under the jurisdiction of the Lokpal.
Lokpal will not be able to initiate suo moto inquiries.

Other significant features of the Bill 21

No prior sanction shall be required for launching prosecution in cases

enquired by Lokpal or initiated on the direction and with the approval of
Lokpal. There are Provisions for confiscation of property acquired by corrupt
means, even while prosecution is pending. Lokpal to be final appellate authority
on all decisions by public authorities relating to provision of public services and
20
Ibid
21
Ibid
 [17]

redressal of grievances containing findings of corruption. Lokpal to have power

of superintendence and direction over any investigation agency including
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for cases referred to them.

Critical Observations on Ombudsman Scheme

The most common criticism of the ombudsman system is that the function is
not generally well understood. There is relatively limited documentation and
information about their work, often confusion and uncertainty about their role,
and with the proliferation of ombudsman offices in different sectors, the
confusion can be exacerbated. In spite of the key characteristic of accessibility,
ombudsman offices are frequently noted for their inaccessibility. Few citizens
are aware of the different ombudsman schemes, how to reach them and how to
process a grievance. Inaccessibility is the chief reason why ombudsman offices
tend to be underutilised, especially by the most disadvantaged who are less
likely to know of the existence of ombudsman and have more difficulty in
registering complaints or grievances. It seems that many ombudsman schemes,
particularly in Britain, are hidden by bureaucracy and formality and lack a
human face. The question of visibility is linked to more general criticisms of the
operational mode of the ombudsman as too reactive, waiting for complaints
rather than taking the office to the public or initiating investigations.
The ombudsman office is also criticized for the fact that its effectiveness
tends to depend upon the character and personality of the ombudsman officer(s)
themselves rather than the system as a whole. Regardless of their organizational
framework they are a highly personalized institution and success demands an
individual or team who are perceived as independent and impartial, with
relevant qualifications and in depth knowledge of the sector, and can command
respect and trust from all parties. Of course, such individuals are hard to find.
Since the ombudsman’s powers lie essentially in recommendation there is a
genuine concern that the ombudsman lacks ‘teeth’. For instance, the annual
report (for many ombudsmen the only public document issued) is often
considered an inadequate instrument for influencing administration procedures
and practice, informing mass media and educating the public. Moreover, the
ombudsman is generally powerless to change or reverse decisions. In fact, some
believe that the ombudsman’s powers as critic and reformer must be
 [18]

strengthened to influence changes in legislation and policy and not just

administrative procedure. The ombudsman should be concerned not merely with
laws or codes as they stand, but also as they might be.

Conclusion
India is a country where honesty and integrities in public and private life
have been glorified and upheld in great epics such as Vedas, Upanishad and in
the books and practices of every religion practiced here. Yet, India today is one
of the most corrupt countries in the world. Bringing public servant and public
functionaries under a scanner which makes them strictly accountable, is the start
of a movement against corruption in India. And one significant step in attacking
the spectrum of corruption in India will be the implementation of the Lok Pal
Bill. Realizing the need of such institution with its immediate effect, a
movement started by Anna Hazare with the support of other volunteers and
social activists. The movement has also shown how media can effectively be
used. Though the propriety regarding active participation of news media in a
movement is debatable, it is true to an extent that Indian media has voluntarily
become a party, a sort of participant, in this drive for Jan Lokpal Bill. There are
charges that elitist media groups that are mostly anti-reservation and want to
establish hegemony over institutions, are behind this movement. No wonder that
the ruling party feels that this mass movement is a media creation.

Therefore, there is a need for a mechanism that would adopt very simple,
independent, speedy and cheaper means of delivering justice by redressing the
grievances of the people. But our Country is famous for its beautiful numerous
laws and its poor execution. Most of the laws have been proved fail to achieve
its goal. No law or institution would have been helped to remove deep roots of
corruption from our country without its proper execution.
 [19]

WEBLIOGRAPHY AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/ombudsman.asp, Key Highlights-

What Is an Ombudsman?
 https://www.adda247.com/upsc-exam/powers-and-functions-of-
ombudsman/
 Second Administrative Reforms Commission: 12TH report, Feb, 2009.
 Triloknath Mishra, Lokpal in India-An Analysis, 2011
 Administrative Reforms Commission Report submitted in 1966
 Interim Report of the Administrative Reforms Commission on Problems
of Citizen’s Grievances, 1966,
 http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/002200804051550.htm
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lokpal
 National Common Minimum Programme of the Government of India,
May 2004
 http://pib.nic.in/archieve/upareport/upa_3_year_highlights.pdf)
 “GoM on Corruption to Firm up Lok Pal Bill at the Earliest, Outlook,
January 21, 2011.
 .

 [20]

INDEX
PAGE
SR.NO PARTICULARS
NO.

1 ABSTRACT 1

2 INTRODUCTION 2

3 DEFINITION OF THE TERM “OMBUDSMAN” 3

4 NATURE OF OMBUDSMAN 4

5 CASE LAW: 5

6 OMBUDSMAN’S JURISDICTION 6

7 POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF OMBUDSMAN 7

8 LOK PAL- LOKAYUKTAS 9

9 RATIONALE FOR AN INSTITUTION – LOK PAL 10

10 HISTORICAL ASPECTS 11

11 JAN LOKPAL BILL 14

 [21]

12 CRITICAL OBSERVATIONS ON OMBUDSMAN SCHEME 17

13 CONCLUSION 18

14 WEBLIOGRAPHY AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 19

ADMINSTRATIVE LAW

Under the Guidance

Of
Prof. Radhika Rodrigues.
 [22]

Presented By :- Devdatta Pradeep Batwal

Roll.No :- 213004
Class :- SYLLB
Signature :-