The Delhi High Court on Thursday directed the Centre to ensure that the Central Bureau of Investigation probe into alleged financial irregularities by a suspended Lalit Kala Akademi secretary is completed in four weeks, saying it is not a “10- year Plan” after the government sought more time.
The court also asked the government to explain why an inquiry by a three-member panel instituted against the cultural body’s current administrator C. S. Krishna Shetty was withdrawn on August 16 this year.
Court observation
A Bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal instructed that the probe against the suspended secretary be completed in four weeks, and sought a report within two weeks after that.
“The fact is someone, who should not have been there, was there for several years,” it observed in reference to the suspended secretary of the Akademi, whose appointment to the post has been challenged in two PILs before the Bench.
It posed the query on Mr. Shetty to the government, which claimed to have taken over the management of Akademi, after an application was moved alleging that the panel to inquire into the administrator’s actions was withdrawn suddenly.
“Why was the inquiry withdrawn after you instituted it,” the Bench asked.
The pleas by Akhilesh Verma and Manish Pushkale have challenged the appointment of Sudhakar Sharma as the secretary of the Akademi. The petitioners, who claim to be artists, had alleged that Mr. Sharma’s appointment was in violation of the provisions of the Lalit Kala Akademi (Secretary, Lalit Kala Akademi) Recruitment Rules, 1999.
They had also alleged that Mr. Sharma had indulged in misappropriation of funds and that he was still in office illegally despite the allegations being proved in an inquiry conducted by the Akademi. Mr. Sharma was earlier suspended by the Akademi in 2015 but the decision was set aside by the Centre the same year. He was suspended again by the Akademi in January 2017, which is in effect.
The court had earlier termed as “eye-wash” the government’s claim that an administrator was controlling the cultural body and said it appeared the secretary had been controlling the affairs of the Akademi.