SC asks petitioner to move AP High Court over Lokayukta legal director’s appointment

The Supreme Court directed a petitioner challenging the appointment of Andhra Pradesh Lokayukta director (legal) Putta Murali Mohan Reddy to approach the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The plea alleged Reddy lacked the required qualifications and sought quashing of his appointment and recovery of salary

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has asked a litigant to approach the Andhra Pradesh High Court for his grievances related to the appointment of Putta Murali Mohan Reddy as director, legal, in the Lokayukta office of the state.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana refused to entertain the plea and asked petitioner Tadiboina Vamsi Krishna to approach the high court, saying the chief justice of the high court understands the law very well.

---

“Since the matter pertains to the appointment of a public office in the state of Andhra Pradesh, we decline to entertain this petition and grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional high court,” the bench ordered on Friday.

During the hearing, senior advocate Anjana Prakash, appearing for the petitioner, sought the court’s intervention in the matter and said the appointment orders need to be quashed.

The petitioner sought quashing of the orders dated September 22, 2021, and August 29, 2023, and removal of Putta Murali Mohan Reddy from the post of director (legal), Lokayukta of Andhra Pradesh (Kurnool).

The petitioner also urged the court for recovery of salary and benefits drawn by Reddy from September 22, 2021, till date and direction to the Lokayukta office not to assign him any work pending disposal of the petition.

Reddy was first appointed deputy director, legal, in the Lokayukta office and then promoted to the director’s post. The grievance of the petitioner is that Reddy did not have the requisite qualification (of a retired district and sessions judge), as he was disqualified twice in the written examination and viva voce.

The petitioner pointed out that this court has itself given him a second chance to appear for the examination, but on sitting for a second time, Reddy “utterly” failed in the said test and oral interview held on March 16, 2019, and June 6, 2019, respectively.

Krishna also claimed that he suffered at the hands of Reddy, as the registrar generals of both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana high courts were avoiding furnishing the basic information.

He claimed that both the state high courts’ registrar generals, with an intention to suppress the records to cover the fraud, were knowingly not furnishing any details, stating that the petitioner was a third party.