Civil dispute pending before court bars Lok Ayukta jurisdiction; Section 12 recommendations cannot become binding directions.

A complaint concerning a dispute already pending before a competent civil court cannot be entertained by the Lok Ayukta or Upa Lok Ayukta, because that forum has no appellate or supervisory jurisdiction over such proceedings, even with party consent. Section 12(1) of the Lok Ayukta Act, 1999 is also confined to a written report with recommendations to the appropriate authority and does not authorise binding or positive directions. The impugned orders were set aside, the complaint was allowed to be withdrawn, and the matter was disposed of in favour of the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Upa Lok Ayukta could entertain a complaint concerning a civil dispute already pending before the Civil Court; (ii) Whether the Upa Lok Ayukta could issue positive directions under Section 12(1) of the Lok Ayukta Act, 1999.

Issue (i): Whether the Upa Lok Ayukta could entertain a complaint concerning a civil dispute already pending before the Civil Court.

Analysis: The dispute was substantially the subject-matter of a civil suit pending before a court of competent jurisdiction. The parties were already pursuing remedies in that forum, and the statutory scheme did not permit the Lok Ayukta or Upa Lok Ayukta to act as an appellate or supervisory authority over such proceedings. Consent of the parties could not cure the inherent lack of jurisdiction where the statute did not confer it.

Conclusion: The complaint ought not to have been entertained and the proceedings before the Upa Lok Ayukta were without jurisdiction.

Issue (ii): Whether the Upa Lok Ayukta could issue positive directions under Section 12(1) of the Lok Ayukta Act, 1999.

Analysis: Section 12(1) contemplates only a report in writing with recommendations to the appropriate authority. The jurisdiction is recommendatory and does not authorise peremptory or positive directions.

Conclusion: The Upa Lok Ayukta had no power to issue positive directions and could only make recommendations.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside, the complaint was permitted to be withdrawn, and the writ petition was disposed of in favour of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a dispute is already pending before a competent civil court, the Lok Ayukta or Upa Lok Ayukta cannot assume jurisdiction over it, and its powers under Section 12(1) are confined to recommendatory action rather than binding directions.

---