Allahabad High Court Admits Plea Challenging CM’s Immunity Under Lokayukta Act, Notice Issued
“No logic, no sense, and no argument can justify such discretion, discrimination, and segregation, except the urge to safeguard corruption, illegalities and mal-administration,” the plea states
The Allahabad HC admits plea challenging CM’s exclusion under Section 2(g) of U.P. Lokayukta Act
In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, on Monday admitted a writ petition filed by former IPS officer Amitabh Thakur questioning the constitutional validity of key provisions of the U.P. Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas Act, 1975. At the same time, the bench dismissed his parallel plea seeking immediate removal of the sitting Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas of the state.
A division bench comprising Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Brij Raj Singh was hearing two separate petitions moved by Thakur, who has been engaged in a series of public interest litigations targeting what he terms as structural weaknesses in the Lokayukta framework of Uttar Pradesh.
The first petition, Writ-C No. 9022 of 2025, challenges two core provisions of the Act. Thakur has sought direction to strike down and accordingly declare the word "Chief Minister" in section 2(g) of the Uttar Pradesh Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas Act, 1975, as null and void. He has also assailed the proviso of Section 5, which permits a Lokayukta or an Up-Lokayukta to continue in office even after their term has expired until a successor assumes charge. According to the petitioner, these provisions are unconstitutional and contrary to democratic principles.
The State government, represented by Additional Chief Standing Counsel Rajesh Tiwari, raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the issue of a Lokayukta’s continuance had already been settled by the Supreme Court in Mohd. Saeed Siddiqui v. State of U.P. (2014). In that case, the top court upheld the validity of the amendment extending the Lokayukta’s tenure from six to eight years, or until a successor entered office.
However, the bench distinguished the present challenge, noting that Thakur has directly assailed the validity of the amended provision itself rather than the appointment or continuance of an individual officeholder. “We are, prima facie, of the opinion that Writ-C No. 9022 of 2025 cannot be dismissed merely on preliminary objection,” the judges observed, issuing notice to the Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh.
The second petition, Writ-C No. 9055 of 2025, sought the removal of the present Lokayukta, Justice Sanjay Mishra, along with Up-Lokayuktas Shambhu Singh Yadav and Dinesh Kumar Singh, and further requested that the State be directed to fill the top post within two months. The bench, however, declined to entertain these prayers.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s earlier rulings and the U.P. Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta Amendment Act, 2024, the judges held that the petitioner had no enforceable legal right to demand such relief. The 2024 amendment prospectively limited the tenure of Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas to five years or until they attained the age of seventy, whichever was earlier. However, this amendment does not retrospectively affect those currently in office.
“Insofar as prayer clause (a) is concerned, such prayer cannot be granted in view of the 2024 amendment being prospective. As for the direction to expedite appointments, we find no subsisting legal right or statutory duty to justify issuance of mandamus,” the order read.
Accordingly, Writ-C 9055 of 2025 was dismissed outright, while Writ-C 9022 of 2025 will now proceed for consideration on the constitutional challenge raised.
Court issued notice to the Advocate General. "List Writ-C No.9022 of 2025 after service of notice," court ordered.
Case Title: Amitabh Thakur vs State of UP
Order Date: September 15, 2025
Bench: Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Brij Raj Singh