Akhilesh govt defends corrupt in court
In a move that is bound to undermine the Akhilesh Yadav government’s determination to fight corruption, the UP government has requested the Allahabad high court to review its recent judgment ordering removal of chairman and CEO of Noida, who are facing probe for alleged graft.
In its review petition, the state government has urged the court to “reconsider” its November 8 order that directs the state government to remove two IAS officers, Rakesh Bahadur and Sanjeev Saran, who are holding the posts of chairman and CEO of Noida respectively. The court had further ordered that the two officers should not be posted anywhere in western UP as their presence could impact the inquiry pending against them.
The state government contended that some relevant and important facts, relevant to the case, were missing in the judgment and hence it should be reviewed by the bench.
It may be recalled that a division bench comprising acting Chief Justice Amitabh Lala and Justice Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel has sought a counter-affidavit on the state’s review petition from Madhav Samaj Nirman Samiti, a social organisation that had challenged the appointment of the two IAS officers to their respective posts. In the November 8 order, the court had also ordered a CBI inquiry into all allegations of irregularities in land allotments in Noida since 2001, charges of financial wrongdoing against the two officers and their appointment to the key posts despite inquiry being pending against them.
Mr Rakesh Bahadur and Mr Sanjeev Saran had been holding the respective posts during 2005-07, when Mulayam Singh Yadav was the chief minister of UP. They were accused of facilitating the sale of prime land to hoteliers at throwaway prices.
A case was registered against the two IAS officers by the subsequent Mayawati regime and they were kept under suspension for close to three years. However, shortly after the SP returned to power this year and Mr Akhilesh Yadav became the chief minister, both the officers were appointed to the same posts despite the inquiry pending against them.
Post new comment