According to the Lokayukt act a retired Supreme Court judge can be appointed as Lokayukta. Naolekar after his retirement from the Supreme Court was appointed Lokayukta. Lokayukta is authorised to investigate complaints of corrupt practices against government servants of all ranks. He is also authorized to enquire into complaints against the Chief Minister and other ministers.

It is for the first time Lokayukta is being given extension. There is also evidence that Lokayukta in no other state of the country has been given extension. The Madhya Pradesh government has granted one year extension by amending the relevant act. Critics say that instead of searching new incumbent the state government has chosen to give extension. The very act of giving one year extension is regarded as a corrupt practice. Observers described it as a bribe given to the Lokayukta. Several complaints against many ministers are pending for disposal. Critics further point out that Naolekar may be influenced by the state government's gesture and may give clean chit to Ministers who are accused of corrupt practices. A few years back he gave clean chit to Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chauhan in what is known as dumper scandal.

State government's decision to grant extension has been criticised by many such eminent persons who served the Lokayukt in different capacities. They included Arun Gurtoo who held the post of Director General Police in the office of Lokayukta. Perhaps the most severe criticism came from Justice (retired) Faizanuddin who retired as a Supreme Court Judge and later who also served in Madhya Pradesh as Lokayukta. He is of view that extension of term for Lokayukta was against the scheme of the constitution and its spirit.

Constitution has a scheme, Lok Sabha, state assemblies, president of India, vice-president, tribunals, commissions are all elected or appointed for a definite period of time, which can’t be extended. Extension to Lokayukta would obviously be in violation to this scheme of the constitution and its spirit. Yes, you can bring in local law and do it, but if you ask the question, was it in keeping with the scheme and spirit of law, the answer would be an emphatic no.

Referring to incumbent Lokayukta, Justice Faizanuddin said, “He is a retired Supreme Court judge, has been holding the prestigious post of Lokayukta for six years. He should introspect, whether he should jeopardize the high dignity of his post for a small benefit. Public opinion on the issue is loud and clear. Yet, if he doesn’t want to ignore the public opinion, so be it. But, being a man who has held such high positions, he should at least introspect and then decide.”

Justice Faizanuddin said that everyone, particularly those coming from legal field, are tied by the restrictions imposed by law and Justice Naolekar should understand it. 'He has a right to ignore the public opinion, but what will happen to decorum that he carried as a retired Supreme Court judge and Lokayukt?' he asked.

He further said that the state government had made up its mind to give extension to the Lokayukta and that’s why the MP Lokayukta Act was amended far ahead of Justice Naolekar’s retirement date. “I expect him to show grit and refuse the offer rather than starting open support of the government in lieu of extension of term.” “I belong to a different school. Such unsavoury controversies pain me greatly but what can I do?” he asked.

Even before the commencement of his extended term, he is alleged to have shown favours while disposing complaints against officers including some Ministers. It is alleged that before the expiry of his six-year term. Naolekar cleared the names of some state ministers against whom there were complaints of corruption. In a first, Justice Naolekar has ‘expunged’ the names of the prime accused in the corruption cases and allowed the investigation to proceed.

Ajay Dubey, an RTI activist who is a complainant in one such case of corruption, said, “So far, there had never been a practice of the Lokayukta ‘expunging’ names of the accused from the complaint. So far, we either had the case filed or Lokayukta proceeding with action in a case. But Justice Naolekar has started a new practice whereby he expunges names of the accused on his own and the case stays.” Dubey also ran a campaign against Justice Naolekar on several objectionable acts by him.

In a startling revelation through RTI, it was disclosed that in the case 07/07/ 30.6.07 against officials and peoples' representatives for issuing NOC to M/s Jaypee Cement to set up a plant at Naubasta in Rewa district and Majhgawan in Sidhi district in exchange of favours, name of home minister Babulal Gaur, who had given the NOC when he held the ministry of commercial tax and industries minister under the previous regime of the Chouhan cabinet is mentioned. The name of Laxmikant Sharma, the then mining minister, had been ‘expunged’ by an order of the Lokayukta on April 5, 2014.

Similarly, the Lokayukta office also disclosed that the names of IAS officer Nikunj Shrivastava and district chief executive officer BS Sharma, who were accused of misappropriating Rs 5.5 crore in the purchase of agricultural equipment under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), were also 'expunged' on February 6, 2015.

In fact, in the MGNREGS’ Chhindwara case, the amount was earlier said to be Rs 13.5 crore and following a complaint to the Union government, a special audit was carried out by joint director, treasury & accounts, Jabalpur, who toned down the quantum of misappropriated funds to Rs 5.5 crore.

Ministers from the current and previous Chouhan cabinets who have not got a clean chit from the Lokayukta include chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Laxmikant Sharma, Babulal Gaur, Ajay Vishnoi, Jayant Mallaiyya, Chudhary Chandrabhan Singh, Kamal Patel, Kailash Vijayvargiya, Ramakant Tiwari and Archana Chitnis. (IPA Service)