The Maharashtra Act of 2023: the Rest, and the Repeal

Read these with section 11, which charges the expenses of the Lokayukta on the Consolidated Fund of the State. The pattern is sections 13 and 40 to 43 of the Lokpal Act, and chapters 130 and 180 explained what charging on the Consolidated Fund achieves and why a budget forwarded "for information" is different from one submitted for approval.

Chapter XI: offences and penalties

Section 50, intentional insult or interruption to, or bringing into disrepute, the Lokayukta. This is section 15 of the 1971 Act carried forward, and it has no counterpart in the Lokpal Act. Chapter 260 read the older provision: six months' simple imprisonment, or fine, or both.

Section 51, prosecution for a false complaint and payment of compensation to the public servant. Section 46 of the Lokpal Act transposed, and every criticism chapter 200 made of that section applies here.

Section 52, false complaint made by a society, association of persons or trust. Section 47 of the Lokpal Act transposed, with the same two limbs of vicarious liability.

Chapter XII: miscellaneous

Section 53, returns and particulars to the State Government.

Section 54, annual report of the Lokayukta. The classical ombudsman sanction, which chapter 20 traced to 1809 and chapter 200 found in section 48 of the Lokpal Act.

Section 55, protection of action taken in good faith by a public servant.

Section 56, the Chairperson, Members, officers and employees to be public servants. Section 52 of the Lokpal Act, and chapter 205 explained why a body that investigates public servants must be composed of them.

Section 57, bar of jurisdiction. Section 54 of the Lokpal Act, and the same limitation applies: it cannot and does not oust articles 226 and 32.

Section 58, legal assistance. Section 55 of the Lokpal Act, the remarkable provision under which the investigating body funds the defence of the person investigated. Chapter 205 set out why it matters.

Sections 59 and 60, overriding effect and the saving of other laws, the pair chapter 210 reconciled: section 59 governs inconsistency, section 60 governs everything else.

Sections 61 and 62, rules by the State Government and regulations by the Lokayukta.

Section 63, laying of rules and regulations before each House of the State Legislature. This is Module III's laying procedure again, and chapter 1230 sets out its three forms.

Section 64, power to remove difficulties.

Section 65, removal of doubts. The counterpart of section 21 of the 1971 Act, which excluded action taken by or with the approval of a judge. Chapter 260 noted that exclusion and why MU's eighth label consequently needs an answer of its own.

Section 66: the repeal, and its present state

Section 66(1). On the commencement of this Act, the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971 (Mah. XLVI of 1971), shall, from such commencement, stand repealed.

Section 66(2), the savings. Notwithstanding the repeal:

1. (a) all applications, suits and other proceedings under the 1971 Act pending on the date of commencement before any court, competent authority, office or authority shall be continued and disposed of in accordance with the repealed Act, as if it had continued in force and this Act had not been passed;
2. (b) any appointment made or rules, notifications or orders issued under the repealed Act and in force on that date shall, in so far as they are not inconsistent with this Act, be deemed to have been made or issued under this Act and shall continue until superseded or modified;
3. (c) all prosecutions instituted under the repealed Act shall be effective and be disposed of in accordance with law.

And the point on which everything in this chapter turns. Section 66 is among the sections not yet brought into force. Section 1(3), as substituted by Mah. 50 of 2025 with effect from 8 December 2025, brought only sections 1, 3 and 4 into force on publication. So:

The Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act 1971 is not repealed. It is the operative law of the State.

Read section 66(2) as a picture of what will happen when it is notified. Pending matters finish under the old Act. Appointments, rules and orders under the old Act carry over so far as they are consistent, so the institution does not have to be rebuilt from nothing. Prosecutions already instituted are unaffected. It is a careful transition, and its careful drafting is a reason to expect the notification rather than to doubt it.

A worked example

A complaint is filed with the Maharashtra Lokayukta on 1 March 2026. Six months later the State Government notifies the remaining sections of the 2023 Act.

Before the notification. The complaint is under the 1971 Act. Chapter 260 sets out the procedure: a copy to the public servant and the competent authority, an opportunity to comment, the powers of a civil court, and a report recommending redress with a one month clock on the competent authority.

On the notification. Section 66(1) repeals the 1971 Act from that date. But section 66(2)(a) provides that proceedings pending under it on the date of commencement shall be continued and disposed of in accordance with the repealed Act. So this complaint finishes under the old law, with the old powers.

A complaint filed the next day goes to the Lokayukta, Maharashtra State, under the 2023 Act, with benches, search and seizure, attachment, confiscation and the section 30 sanction procedure.

And the Lokayukta in office on that date. Section 66(2)(b) deems his appointment, so far as it is not inconsistent with the new Act, to have been made under the new Act.

What beginners get wrong

That the 1971 Act is repealed. It is not, because section 66 is not in force.

That pending complaints will be transferred to the new machinery. Section 66(2)(a) says the opposite: they are continued and disposed of under the repealed Act.

That the new Act has no offence of insulting the Lokayukta. Section 50 carries it forward from section 15 of the 1971 Act; the Lokpal Act has no such provision.

That section 57 makes the Lokayukta's decisions final. It bars courts in the same terms as section 54 of the Lokpal Act, and cannot oust articles 226 and 32.

Quick revision

s.41 delegation; s.42 power to review, which the Lokpal Act does not have.

s.43 Special Courts; s.44 assessment of loss and recovery.

s.45 removal of the Chairperson and Members; s.46 complaints against the Lokayukta's officials.

ss.47 to 49 budget, grants, accounts, read with s.11, expenses charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State.

s.50 insult or disrepute, carried from s.15 of the 1971 Act; s.51 false complaint; s.52 false complaint by a society or trust.

s.54 annual report; s.56 public servants; s.57 bar of jurisdiction; s.58 legal assistance; ss.59 and 60 overriding effect and saving; ss.61 to 63 rules, regulations and laying; s.64 removal of difficulties; s.65 removal of doubts.

s.66: repeals the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act 1971 on commencement, saving pending proceedings under the old Act, carrying over consistent appointments and rules, and preserving prosecutions. Not yet in force.

Test yourself

1. What does section 66 provide, and what is its present effect? Section 66(1) repeals the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act 1971 on the commencement of the 2023 Act. Section 66(2) saves pending applications, suits and proceedings, which are to be continued and disposed of under the repealed Act; deems appointments, rules, notifications and orders under the repealed Act, so far as they are not inconsistent, to have been made under the new Act; and preserves prosecutions already instituted. Its present effect is none, because section 66 has not been brought into force: only sections 1, 3 and 4 are, so the Act of 1971 remains the operative law.

2. Name two provisions the 2023 Act has that the Lokpal Act does not, and one it carries from the 1971 Act. The power to review its own decisions under section 42, and the separate grievance jurisdiction in Chapter VI, sections 31 and 32. From the 1971 Act it carries the offence of intentionally insulting or interrupting the Lokayukta or bringing him into disrepute, which was section 15 of that Act and is section 50 of this one.

3. A complaint is pending under the 1971 Act when the 2023 Act is fully notified. What happens to it? It is continued and disposed of in accordance with the repealed Act, as if that Act had continued in force and the new Act had not been passed, by virtue of section 66(2)(a). The powers available in it therefore remain the 1971 powers, that is investigation and a report recommending redress, and not the search, attachment and confiscation powers of the new Act.

4. Where in this Act does the laying procedure appear, and why is it worth noticing here? In section 63, which requires rules made by the State Government under section 61 and regulations made by the Lokayukta under section 62 to be laid before each House of the State Legislature. It is worth noticing because laying is the classical instrument of legislative control over delegated legislation, which is the sixth label of this syllabus, and it appears inside an ombudsman statute; the same provision appears as section 61 of the Lokpal Act.