Government
The PIL by two non-profit organisations has called for an investigation into allegations against Khandu for awarding public contracts to his family members.
New Delhi: Citing the Code of Conduct for ministers, the Union government has told the Supreme Court that it cannot probe the allegations of corruption and nepotism against Arunachal Pradesh chief minister and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Pema Khandu.
The Union government filed an affidavit in this regard before the apex court, which was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) by two non-profit organisations which have called for an investigation into allegations against Khandu for awarding public contracts to his family members, .
In its affidavit, the Union government said that the Code of Conduct for ministers that governs Khandu comes under the jurisdiction of the state and the Union Finance Ministry’s public procurement rules are not binding on the states.
Earlier, the petitioners said that Khandu not only violated the Code of Conduct binding on all state and central ministers issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), but also failed to honour the procurement rules of the Union Finance Ministry.
After the Union government had failed to file a response even after a court order on March 18, the Supreme Court had last month given it three weeks to file it.
The PIL has been filed by two NGOs – Save Mon Region Foundation and Voluntary Arunachal Sena, accusing Khandu, his father’s second wife Rinchin Drema, and his nephew Tsering Tashi, as beneficiaries of the contracts.
In its affidavit, the Union government said that the Code of Conduct certainly binds all ministers of states and centre. It also referred to an office memorandum of MHA dated September 18, 2025, that held Clause 2(d) of Code of Conduct for Ministers applies to ministers of both Union and states.
This Code says, “After taking office, and so long as he remains in office, the Minister shall ensure that the members of his family do not start, or participate in, business concerns, engaged in supplying goods or services to that government (excepting in the usual course of trade or business and at standard or market rates) or dependent primarily on grant of licenses, permits, quotas, leases, etc. from that government.”
However, the Union government then said in its affidavit that the MHA does not have any further role in the matter.
“The MHA does not have any further role whatsoever in the matter. In fact, the issues flagged in the writ petition fall within the domain of the state government,” the government stated in the affidavit, reported Hindustan Times.
The petitioners, represented by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi also expressed concerns over the procedures followed in the public procurement process by the Arunachal Pradesh government.
“The Code of Conduct specifically says that ministers should ensure their families do not participate in government tenders. We must have a clear-cut answer on what was the process followed if tenders were not called for. This must be stated,” the Supreme Court had earlier said in March this year.
Responding to the allegations, the Arunachal government had said in July that “no government contracts were awarded” to Khandu or the persons named as alleged beneficiaries in the petition.
It had said that 95% of the contracts which were awarded to firms or individuals related to Khandu, Drema or Tashi were through the process of “open tender” and were given after inviting and evaluation of technical and financial bids. The state government had denied adopting any “pick and choose” or showing “undue favour” in respect of any of the beneficiaries named.
This article went live on October thirty-first, two thousand twenty five, at twelve minutes past two in the afternoon.