Lok Ayukta jurisdiction cannot extend to quasi-judicial tax orders where statute provides an alternate remedy.

The Lok Ayukta can act only where the complaint discloses grievance or allegation arising from maladministration in the exercise of administrative functions; it cannot assume appellate or supervisory control over a quasi-judicial order passed under a special statute. The assessing authority's rejection of the option to settle sales tax arrears under the Amnesty Scheme-2020 was an adjudicatory act for which statutory remedies existed, so the complaint before the Lok Ayukta was not maintainable and its report was set aside on jurisdiction alone.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Lok Ayukta had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and to set aside the assessing authority's order rejecting the option to settle sales tax arrears under the Amnesty Scheme-2020.

Analysis: Under Section 7 of the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999, the Lok Ayukta may investigate action complained of only where there is a grievance or an allegation. A grievance must arise from maladministration, and maladministration under Section 2(k) covers only action taken in the exercise of administrative functions that is unreasonable, unjust, oppressive, improperly discriminatory, or attended by willful negligence or undue delay. The rejection of the option under the Amnesty Scheme-2020 was an adjudicatory or quasi-judicial act of the assessing authority, against which the statute provided its own remedies. The Lok Ayukta is not an appellate or supervisory authority over statutory forums and cannot bypass or override the remedies created under the special enactment.

Conclusion: The Lok Ayukta lacked jurisdiction to examine the correctness of the assessing authority's order, and the complaint was not maintainable before it.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, the Lok Ayukta's report was set aside, and the Court confined its decision to the question of jurisdiction without going into the merits of the amnesty claim.

Ratio Decidendi: A complaint before the Lok Ayukta is maintainable only when the impugned action amounts to maladministration in the exercise of administrative functions, and the Lok Ayukta cannot exercise appellate or supervisory control over a quasi-judicial order for which the statute provides an alternate remedy.

---