Notice to TANGEDCO on plea to suspend supply

Justice M Duraiswamy, before whom the petition from Kalaivani Transport, Chennai, who was awarded contract for the transportation of the chamber weighing 149 metric tons had come up issued notice returnable by two weeks. The plea submitted that the vehicle carrying the chamber was stopped at MFL junction at Manali as it had to cross high tension tower line and another between Minjur and Ponneri Road for want of switching of power by the TANGEDCO to avoid any untoward incidents. 

Though a representation to the TANGEDCO, North Chennai, to switch off the above power lines was made on May 24, to their shock and surprise the executive engineer, operation, had issued a letter on June 27 directing them to pay Rs 54.16 lakh towards shut down charges. The plea also said that similiar request was made by the Deputy Director SDSC SHAR, no action has come forth. 

Writ petition against Anna Univ dismissed

It is not for the court to go into fishing and roving inquiry into the affairs of educational institutions in the absence of any specific allegations, observed the Madras High Court on Saturday while dismissing a writ petition seeking CBI investigation into the allegations of rampant bribery by Anna University, while extending affiliation to colleges.

The first bench comprising Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar, while dismissing a petition moved by an Anna University alumnus D Govintharajan of Chidambaram, said, “The petitioner has alleged that there has been deterioration in the standard of Anna University owing to 

involvement and intervention of certain unknown persons in the activities of the University. No person has been named, nor the activities specified, in which unknown persons are allegedly involved.” 

Also, noting that the Director (Affiliation), the Registrar and the Vice-Chancellor (in-Charge) wanting to become the Vice-Chancellor of Anna University or other universities in the state cannot by itself amount to any misdemeanour or offence, the bench said. “There is a vague allegation of alleged bribery, which is devoid of any particulars. There is not a whisper of who in what manner and for what purpose has accepted the bribes or abused official position. The allegation of collecting bribes for extending affiliation is also devoid of particulars,” the first bench observed.