The Madras High Court Friday ordered that status quo be maintained on the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti corruption probe into alleged irrregularities in the construction of the new secretartiat during DMK rule.
The division bench, comprising Justices Huluvadi G Ramesh and K Kalyanasundaram, before which an appeal by DMK leader M K Stalin came up, challenging a single judge order, ordering the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti corruption to initiate a probe if there was a prima facie case, ordered status quo be maintained and posted the case to October 22.
The effect of Friday's order is that the status of enquiry as of today should be maintained.
The single judge had in August ordered the government to hand over all files relating to the Justice Reghupathy commission of Inquiry, set up by the then AIADMK government in 2011 to probe alleged irregularities in construction of the new secretariat here during DMK rule, to the DVAC.
Narrating the background of the case, Advocate General Vijay Narayan submitted there was charge of irregularities in the construction of new secretariat. So the Reghupathy Commission of Inquiry was appointed to probe them.
However, the petitioner moved the High Court and obtained a stay. "The Commission of Inquiry came to a near standstill," he said.
The single judge, before whom the case came up in August this year, felt that the constitution of Commission of Inquiry was an unnecessary waste of public money.
If the state feels a crime was committed, it can straightaway refer it to DVAC, he had said, following which the government entrusted the probe to the agency.
If a preliminary enquiry revealed cognizable offences were made out, then it would be sent to the Vigilance Commissioner following which an FIR would be registered,which had not yet been done
As the process of law had been set in motion, the enquiry has to go on, he added.
The government estate was the pet project of former chief minister late M Karunanidhi and was converted to a super speciality hospital after the late chief minister Jayalalithaa returned to power in 2011.
Stalin submitted that the single judge has not considered that a petition abates on the death of a petitioner and no further adjudication can be made, especially when the dispute in the petition was personal, and it cannot be carried on by impleading his legal heirs.
The judge has not considered that when a petition was being dismissed as withdrawn, there was no scope to make observations in the nature of directions in the petition, which affect the rights of the appellant,he said.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)