Ghose Commission indicted KCR for procedural lapses, but skipped key procedure itself
The Justice P.C. Ghose Commission, which faulted KCR over the Kaleshwaram project, is accused of violating Section 8(B) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act. Legal experts say the lapse breaches natural justice and could render the report legally unsustainable
Hyderabad: In a striking paradox, the Justice PC Ghose Commission, which faulted former Chief Minister K Chandrashekar Rao for procedural lapses in the execution of the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme (KLIS), appears to have committed a critical procedural violation of its own. This would not only undermine the credibility and legal standing of its findings, but also prove politically counterproductive for the Congress government.
After making serious allegations against Chandrashekhar Rao, former Ministers T Harish Rao and Eatela Rajender as well as several officials, the Commission failed to issue mandatory notices under Section 8(B) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952. While they have appeared before the Commission and responded to questions, they were not given a fresh and final opportunity to defend themselves or cross-examine those making allegations against them, after the Commission decided to hold them culpable.
Legal experts argue that this failure is not a mere procedural technicality but a breach of natural justice, which ensures that no individual is condemned unheard.
Senior BRS leader and former MP B Vinod Kumar who is also an advocate, strongly objected to the Commission’s conclusions in violation of Section 8(C) of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952. He said the denial of such a fundamental right rendered the report questionable. “When a Commission finds someone guilty, it must give them an opportunity not just to appear but to defend through counsel, arguments, and cross-examination. That did not happen here,” he asserted.
This principle was unequivocally affirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2003 L.K. Advani vs State of Bihar case, and later reiterated by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 2014, which struck down parts of the THB Chalapathi Commission’s findings for this very reason.
With the Telangana government now planning to table the report in the Assembly, and the BRS preparing its legal and political counter-offensive, the Commission’s own procedural lapse may become its undoing. In effect, a Commission constituted to probe alleged procedural failures, is now being charged with procedural failure itself. The PC Ghose Commission now risks being labelled hasty, biased and also unconstitutional.
Further, by flouting Section 8(B), the Ghose Commission has effectively undercut its own credibility in a court of law. Thus, any adverse remark against Chandrashekhar Rao or others could be deemed null and void, for procedural lapses. The report may not stand judicial scrutiny unless rectified, and even that may now be too late.
