My complaint to the Lokayukta against Sri Sudhakar Rao


Complainant: J.N.Jayashree
C/O M.N.Vijayakumar,IAS
Member, Karnataka appellate Tribunal,
M.S.Building, Bangalore

Respondent: Sri Sudhakar Rao, IAS
Chief Secretary to government
Vidhana Saudha
Bangalore 560 001

Complainant submits as follows:

1. The complainant is married to Sri M.N.Vijayakumar, IAS. Complainant’s husband is working without closing his eyes to corrupt practices of his senior officers and is subjected to all sorts of harassments and humiliations.. He has survived attempts on his life. The respondent’s harassment and obstacle to my husband’s work increased after the respondent took charge as Chief Secretary. In order to seek protection to my husband, I had sought an appointment with the respondent. After long delay, instead of addressing my concern, he made his office send a message to the complainant threatening that even honest and sincere officers who worked with my husband would be affected. The respondent made it clear that he would go to any extent to shield corrupt officers even if it meant physically harming my husband. As my husband was in a very vulnerable place (already attempts had been made on his life that too while he was under the police protection) I decided to file this complaint now against the respondent fearing more danger as long as my husband continued to be in Belgaum. The Police Officer who was looking after my husband’s security had also advised him to write to the Director, CBI directly. I have obtained information from various offices under the RTI Act. I found that most of the information have already been given to Hon’ble Lokayukta by my husband.

2. The harassment of my husband by the respondent increased after my husband brought the details of corrupt practices in the water Resources Department on record in the proceedings of the Board meetings he had chaired. These details are also available with the Hon’ble Lokayukta The extent to which the respondent went to harass my husband are available in the various letters my husband addressed to the respondent himself and these harassments and humiliation by the respondent have not stopped till today. At every stage the respondent to protect corrupt officers from being punished intensified harassing my husband. This he resorted to because of the documentation made by husband giving details and methods by which money meant for the farmers were looted in a systematic way and when my husband did not co-operate with such corrupt officers he was continuously obstructed from discharging his work and the respondent acted in many ways to increase threats to his life. When my husband devised his own methods to protect himself, the respondent used many methods and tried to mentally break him down.. The information obtained by me also reveals that my husband even informed the statutory Committee of the Legislature about the obstacles and harassment he faced because of his stand against corrupt practices. I also understand from the information I have obtained under the RTI Act that even the annual printed report of CADA, Belgaum mentions explicitly the obstacles faced by my husband in performing his duties. In addition to getting all my husband’s decision stayed the respondent totally misusing his authority made sure that information sought by my husband for his routine works were denied to him (my husband had already brought on record the fact that more than 60% of the money had been looted in a large number of works when in fact not more than 40% work had been done. All these in the name of giving benefits to farmers – details of some such works have been reported to the Water Resources Department. The respondent misused his authority to make even the members to not to attend statutory meetings called by my husband. All these are certainly worse than mal-administration and should be termed as bureaucracy run by criminals and not just corrupt officers

3 I also learnt that in the various reports given to the Police by my husband give the role of the respondent in the criminal conspiracy have been given. In this regard I have filed a separate complaint with the Director, CBI

4. All actions taken by the respondent till today are either to increase risks to his life or to humiliate him .

5. Complainant further submits every single action of the respondent is surely a case of maladministration (in all possible manners as defined in the Karnataka Lokayukta Act) and these were carried out by the respondent to obstruct my husband from functioning. He was also continuously obstructed from working as required by his Service Rules. The harassment caused to my husband is also causing undue hardship to me and my son. My husband has not given our residential address to the respondent as in the past we have been threatened near our house itself It is unfortunate that the respondent who should be encouraging my husband’s sincere work to help the poor resorted to mean methods to harass, humiliate and prevent my husband from discharging his duties to help the public. All materials needed to establish my complaint are available with the Hon’ble Lokayukta, H.E. the Governor of Karnataka’s Office, , Office of Belgaum superintendent of Police, Water resources Department and most importantly in the respondent’s Office. I want to submit that Karnataka continues to be rated as one of the most corrupt states because corrupt officers like the respondent are so sure of protection from all Authorities or in some cases exploit the deliberate helplessness created by the corrupt officers- as is true in the case of the Lokayukta. This is evident from the various statements given to the press and TV channels by the Hon’ble Lokayukta himself.

6. I am filing complaints with the Hon’ble Lokayukta and the CBI against the respondent on 31/10/08 -the Vigilance day. The Central Vigilance Commission has stated clearly that this year the focus is to encourage whistle blowing. I am filing these complaints to create awareness among the citizens of Karnataka , that such a day is supposed to have been observed under the guidance of the Chief Secretary to encourage and protect whistleblowers . The website of the Central Vigilance Commission also makes it clear that the copies to observe Vigilance week have been marked to all Chief Secretaries in the country and it appears that the Chief Secretary of Karnataka is more for protecting the corrupt than encouraging honest officers. Till yesterday the respondent had not sent any instructions to observe Vigilance Day, With officers like the respondent at the helm of affairs Karnataka has never observed Vigilance Day even once . It is no wonder that Karnataka continues to get branded as one of the most corrupt states in the country and the credit really goes more to the corrupt officers occupying important posts than anyone else. In fact the pledge on the website starts with We the Public Servants of India…If the respondent is not taking the lead in Karnataka , it means the respondent considers himself as not a public servant. Then the question that arises is whom is he serving other than the public. Certainly this is also worse than mal-administration

I request the Hon’ble Lokayukta to set up a special team to investigate into the corrupt practices of the respondent which have resulted in the continuous harassment and humiliation of my husband .The proceedings of the CADA dated 17/9/08 could be used as the starting point for taking up the investigation. As far as harassment and attempts on his life I have approached the CBI.(Copy of the letter is available in my website) This will certainly help the honest and sincere officers who are being harassed for raising their voices against the corrupt practices of their senior officers. I do not want any other honest officer to go through what my husband has faced and hence I am filing this complaint against the respondent


Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 License.