An affidavit by Delhi government's concerned department was filed before Justice V P Vaish saying that it is "firmly committed to implementing the Lokayukta Act".
It sought dismissal of a former BJP MLA's petition seeking direction to immediately fill up the post of Lokayukta, saying it is "motivated petition, filed... for achieving narrow political gains" and not "public interest".
"Proviso (A) to Section 3 of Lokayukta Act, mandates that Lokayukta is to be appointed in consultation with Delhi high court chief justice and the Leader of Opposition.
"The answering respondent (Delhi government) in compliance of the said statuary mandates, initiated the process of consultation by submitting its suggestion for filling in the vacant post of Lokayukta in a sealed cover, by a letter date July 10, 2015, to Delhi high court chief justice," the Delhi government affidavit said.
"It is therefore most respectfully submitted that the process of appointment of Lokayukta has been initiated and is in process. The present petition may be kindly dismissed as infructuous," it added.
The Delhi government's response came in backdrop of the court's notice issued on May 15 while hearing a plea filed by BJP leader Sat Prakash Rana for appointment of Lokayukta.
Rana's counsel Jayant Nath has contended that though AAP government assumed charge in Delhi on February 14 it has "not yet taken any step for the appointment of the Lokayukta and Uplokayukta here".
The clause for removal of Lokayukta or Upalokayukta mentions that they shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the Governor passed after an address by each House of the state legislature supported by simple majority of the total membership of the House has been presented to the Governor in the same session for such removal on the ground of proven misbehaviour or incapacity.
The notice of motion for removal of Lokayukta or Upalokayukta may be given in writing to the speaker or chairman of the state council duly signed by not less than one-third of the total membership of both the Houses.
On admission of the motion, they shall refer the matter to the Chief Justice of Karnataka high court for investigation on the grounds over which the removal is prayed for.
If the misbehaviour or incapacity of Lokayukta or Upalokayukta shall be deemed to have been proved, an address praying for removal of either shall be presented to the governor duly signed by the speaker and the chairman.
Once the governor gives assent to the address, the Lokayukta or Upalokayukta shall be deemed to have been removed from office in accordance with the law.
Under the present Act, the Lokayukta can be removed by an order of the governor after an address by each House of the legislature, supported by not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting.
The investigation for proof of misbehaviour or incapacity of Lokayukta has to be done as provided in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, by a three-member committee, comprising two judges and a jurist.
The procedure is similar to that for impeachment of a high court or Supreme Court judge, except that the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, uses the word "removal", instead of impeachment.