<p>The petitioners, Col C P Muthanna (Retd) and Ravi Chengappa of Kodagu had filed a PIL to resolve the dispute between the Lokayukta and Justice B Padmaraj, as to who is the competent authority to inquire into the allegations made against the chief minister, some of his ministers and their relatives.<br /><br />The Chief Justice said the matter would be heard on Monday. “I asked you to mention about it on Monday, it will be taken up next Monday now,” the bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar said.<br /><br />The petitioners had submitted that the controversy was looming large day by day and these developments would give rise to an apprehension whether the inquiry would really be taken up by any of these authorities.<br /><br />He also pointed out that Justice Padmaraj, who has been appointed under the Commission of Enquiry Act 1952, had sought for the records from the Lokayukta to conduct the enquiry and the Lokayukta himself, appointed statutorily, has refused to part with the records, the petitioner said. “In the process, no progress has been made in the matter of allegations.” <br /><br />They have sought the Court’s directions to declare the competent authority and to expedite the investigation and submit a report.<br /></p>
<p>The petitioners, Col C P Muthanna (Retd) and Ravi Chengappa of Kodagu had filed a PIL to resolve the dispute between the Lokayukta and Justice B Padmaraj, as to who is the competent authority to inquire into the allegations made against the chief minister, some of his ministers and their relatives.<br /><br />The Chief Justice said the matter would be heard on Monday. “I asked you to mention about it on Monday, it will be taken up next Monday now,” the bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar said.<br /><br />The petitioners had submitted that the controversy was looming large day by day and these developments would give rise to an apprehension whether the inquiry would really be taken up by any of these authorities.<br /><br />He also pointed out that Justice Padmaraj, who has been appointed under the Commission of Enquiry Act 1952, had sought for the records from the Lokayukta to conduct the enquiry and the Lokayukta himself, appointed statutorily, has refused to part with the records, the petitioner said. “In the process, no progress has been made in the matter of allegations.” <br /><br />They have sought the Court’s directions to declare the competent authority and to expedite the investigation and submit a report.<br /></p>
