S.
THANGAPAZHAM LAW COLLEGE
Affiliated to the Tamilnadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University,
Chennai.
Approved by Bar Council of India, New Delhi.
Vasudevanallur.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
7
Assignment On
Ombudsman
Name : [Link] Manohar
Roll. No : 323U2269 Submitted to
Course : III-LLB [Link]
Date : (Assistant Professor)
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Historical Background and Evolution
3. Structure and Jurisdiction of Lokpal and Lokayuktas
4. Functions and Powers
5. Judicial Interpretation and Case Law
6. Challenges in Implementation
7. Role in Strengthening Democracy
8. Comparative Perspective
9. Conclusion
10. References
Ombudsman in India
Introduction
The institution of the Ombudsman plays a crucial role in ensuring administrative accountability and
promoting transparency within governance structures. Originating in Sweden in the early 19th century,
the Ombudsman was conceptualized as a public officer appointed by the legislature to oversee the
administrative machinery and investigate complaints made by citizens against public authorities. The
idea was to provide a neutral, accessible, and effective channel for the redressal of grievances, without
the cost and complexity of judicial proceedings. Over time, the concept has been adopted in various
forms by numerous democratic nations, including India. In the Indian context, the Ombudsman is
manifested through the Lokpal and Lokayuktas, whose primary function is to combat corruption and
abuse of power among public officials and institutions.
The necessity of an Ombudsman in a democratic setup like India cannot be overstated. The enormous
size and complexity of the Indian administrative apparatus mean that instances of maladministration,
corruption, and inefficiency are bound to occur. Traditional legal remedies are often expensive, time-
consuming, and inaccessible to the common man. It is in this context that the Ombudsman serves as a
vital instrument of administrative justice. In India, despite initial resistance and delays, the institution
has taken root with the establishment of the Lokpal at the national level and Lokayuktas in various
states. The enactment of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 was a landmark moment, signifying the
government’s commitment to transparency and public accountability.
Historical Background and Evolution
The earliest precedent for the Ombudsman is found in Sweden, where the concept was formally
introduced in 1809. The Swedish Parliament established the office to safeguard citizens’ rights by
monitoring the activities of the executive. The concept gradually spread across Europe, and countries
like Finland, Denmark, and Norway adopted their versions of the Ombudsman. In the post-colonial
context, several countries in Asia and Africa also adopted similar models to address the need for
administrative oversight.
In India, the idea of establishing an Ombudsman-like institution can be traced back to the 1960s. The
first concrete recommendation for the appointment of a Lokpal was made by the Administrative
Reforms Commission (ARC) in 1966. The ARC proposed a two-tier system: a Lokpal at the central
level and Lokayuktas in the states. Despite multiple attempts, the bill to establish the Lokpal failed to
pass in Parliament for several decades. It was not until the public outcry against corruption in the early
2010s, epitomized by the India Against Corruption movement led by Anna Hazare, that the Lokpal bill
gained traction. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act was finally enacted in 2013 and came into force on
January 16, 2014. The act provides for the establishment of an independent body to inquire into
allegations of corruption against public functionaries, including the Prime Minister, Ministers, and
Members of Parliament.
Structure and Jurisdiction of Lokpal and Lokayuktas
The Lokpal is a statutory body consisting of a Chairperson and a maximum of eight members, of whom
fifty percent must be judicial members. The Chairperson may be a former Chief Justice of India or a
retired judge of the Supreme Court or an eminent person with expertise in public administration,
vigilance, or law. The members of the Lokpal are appointed by the President of India on the
recommendation of a Selection Committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the Lok
Sabha, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of India or a Judge nominated
by him, and an eminent jurist. The jurisdiction of the Lokpal extends to all categories of public
servants, including the Prime Minister, Ministers, Members of Parliament, and officers of the central
government. The Prime Minister is, however, subject to certain limitations in terms of inquiry,
especially concerning matters related to external affairs, internal security, and public order.
The act also mandates that every state must establish a Lokayukta to investigate allegations of
corruption against public functionaries at the state level. The structure and powers of the Lokayukta
vary from state to state, as states are given the freedom to design their own laws within the broad
framework provided by the central act. Some states, such as Maharashtra and Karnataka, were early
adopters and have had functioning Lokayuktas for several decades. Other states have been slower to
comply, leading to an uneven implementation of the institution across the country.
Functions and Powers
The primary function of the Lokpal is to inquire into allegations of corruption and maladministration
involving public officials. The Lokpal has the authority to conduct preliminary inquiries, investigations,
and initiate prosecutions. It can refer matters to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or other
investigative agencies, direct disciplinary action against officials, and recommend systemic reforms to
prevent future misconduct. The Lokpal also has the power to order the seizure of assets and property,
attach proceeds of corruption, and initiate proceedings for recovery.
Similarly, the Lokayuktas in the states have been vested with powers to investigate complaints against
ministers, legislators, and public servants in the state administration. They function as quasi-judicial
authorities and often work in coordination with the Anti-Corruption Bureaus (ACB) or state vigilance
departments. In some states, the Lokayukta also acts as a grievance redressal authority for complaints
of delay, inaction, and inefficiency in public service delivery.
The functioning of the Lokpal is supported by the Lokpal’s Inquiry Wing and the Prosecution Wing.
The Inquiry Wing conducts detailed investigations, while the Prosecution Wing is responsible for filing
and pursuing cases in courts. The Lokpal has the authority to oversee and supervise the functioning of
the CBI in cases referred by it and can also issue directions for transfers of officers and prioritization of
investigations.
Judicial Interpretation and Case Law
The Indian judiciary has played a pivotal role in shaping the contours of the Ombudsman system and
reinforcing its relevance in the governance structure. In the case of Vineet Narain v. Union of India, the
Supreme Court laid down guidelines to insulate the Central Bureau of Investigation from political
interference and stressed the need for independent bodies to investigate corruption. The judgment
emphasized the importance of a mechanism like the Lokpal to ensure that the investigative agencies
remain autonomous and accountable to the people.
In the case of Prakash Singh v. Union of India, although the case focused primarily on police reforms,
the court reiterated the importance of creating independent oversight bodies to ensure accountability
and efficiency in the administration. The court noted that internal reforms are insufficient without an
external, impartial body to monitor and investigate misconduct.
The case of Common Cause v. Union of India involved a challenge to the delay in the appointment of
the Lokpal. The Supreme Court directed the government to expedite the process and ensure compliance
with the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act. The judgment reaffirmed the constitutional obligation to combat
corruption and held that the absence of a Lokpal undermines the public’s trust in the integrity of
governance.
Another notable decision is that of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, although not
directly related to the Lokpal, the case emphasized the importance of transparent and accountable
governance as an element of the right to privacy and the broader framework of constitutional morality.
Challenges in Implementation
Despite the progressive nature of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, the implementation of the institution
has faced several challenges. One of the major issues is the delay in the appointment of the Lokpal and
its members. Even after the enactment of the law in 2013, the first Lokpal was appointed only in 2019,
after sustained pressure from civil society and intervention by the judiciary. The delay undermined the
credibility of the government’s commitment to fighting corruption and weakened public confidence in
the institution.
Another challenge is the lack of adequate resources, infrastructure, and autonomy. The Lokpal has
struggled to recruit qualified personnel, establish regional offices, and build a robust mechanism for
inquiry and prosecution. Similarly, many states have either not constituted Lokayuktas or have
appointed individuals without the necessary independence or competence. The effectiveness of these
institutions depends on their ability to act without fear or favor, and this is compromised when they lack
the necessary legal, financial, and administrative support.
Political interference also remains a concern. There have been instances where Lokayuktas have faced
resistance or even threats from the state government when attempting to investigate powerful
politicians or bureaucrats. The lack of follow-up on the Lokpal’s recommendations further dilutes its
authority and impact.
Role in Strengthening Democracy
Despite the challenges, the institution of the Ombudsman holds great promise in strengthening
democratic governance in India. It provides an accessible and effective remedy for citizens who face
corruption, abuse of power, or administrative neglect. By offering a non-judicial platform for grievance
redressal, the Ombudsman reduces the burden on the courts and complements the role of the judiciary.
It also fosters a culture of accountability and integrity in public life by deterring malfeasance and
promoting ethical conduct among officials.
The presence of an independent authority like the Lokpal or Lokayukta also helps in enhancing citizen
participation and trust in government institutions. When citizens know that their complaints will be
heard and acted upon impartially, it encourages engagement with the democratic process and
discourages cynicism. In the long run, institutions like the Ombudsman contribute to the creation of a
responsive, transparent, and people-centric administration.
Comparative Perspective
In comparing the Indian Ombudsman system with those in other countries, certain differences become
evident. In Scandinavian countries, where the institution originated, the Ombudsman enjoys high levels
of independence and public trust, often functioning with minimal political interference. In the United
Kingdom, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman provides an accessible and robust
mechanism for redressal of grievances against public services. In Australia and New Zealand, the
Ombudsman plays a proactive role in investigating systemic issues and recommending administrative
reforms.
India’s Ombudsman system is still evolving, and much can be learned from these international models.
Ensuring functional autonomy, securing adequate resources, and empowering the institutions with
binding authority can go a long way in realizing the full potential of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas.
Conclusion
The establishment of the Ombudsman through the Lokpal and Lokayuktas represents a significant
milestone in India’s journey towards transparent and accountable governance. It institutionalizes the
principle that those entrusted with public power must be held answerable to the people. Although the
journey has not been smooth, and numerous challenges remain, the existence of such an institution
reflects the democratic spirit and the will to reform. For the Ombudsman to truly succeed, it must be
supported with political will, administrative cooperation, and active civil society engagement. The role
of the judiciary in upholding its independence and the continued demand from citizens for
accountability are critical for the institution to thrive. As India continues to grapple with the complex
demands of modern governance, the Ombudsman will remain a vital pillar in the architecture of
administrative justice and public integrity.
References
1. Books and Commentaries
◦ M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, LexisNexis, 8th Edition, 2018
◦ D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, LexisNexis, 24th Edition, 2018
◦ V.N. Shukla, Constitution of India, Eastern Book Company, 13th Edition, 2020
◦ B.L. Wadehra, Public Administration: Concepts and Theories, Sterling Publishers, 2017
◦ S.P. Sathe, Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 7th Edition, 2015
2. Legislative Materials
◦ The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013
◦ The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended)
◦ Reports of the Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), 1966 and 2007
3. Case Laws
◦ Vineet Narain v. Union of India, AIR 1998 SC 889
◦ Common Cause v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 574
◦ Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1
◦ Prakash Singh v. Union of India, (2006) 8 SCC 1
4. Articles and Journals
◦ P. M. Bakshi, “The Indian Ombudsman: Issues and Prospects,” Journal of the Indian
Law Institute, Vol. 31, No. 3, 1989
◦ S. R. Maheshwari, “The Ombudsman: A Tool for Administrative Accountability in
India,” Indian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 39, 1993
◦ R. Sudarshan, “Anti-Corruption Institutions and Practices in India,” India Review, Vol.
11, No. 2, 2012
5. Government and Institutional Reports
◦ Second Administrative Reforms Commission, “Ethics in Governance,” 2007
◦ Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill,
2011
◦ Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and
Pensions, Government of India – Lokpal and Lokayuktas (Rules)
