Madras HC orders TN govt to dismiss Justice Regupathi commission

Passing orders on a vacate stay petition moved by the State against the stay pending for the past three years on Justice R Regupathi Commission-formed to investigate the alleged irregularities in the construction of New Secretariat building at Omandurar, Justice SM Subramaniam said. “The State is directed to review the functionings of all the Commission of Inquiries and take a decision in respect of its further continuance, dissolving the same or fixing the time limit for the submission of report based on legal principles settled by the SC and the observations made in this order, within four weeks.” 

On noting that the State at the first instance should invoke the powers of criminal prosecution, the judge also directed the Secretary, R Regupathi Commission of Inquiry as well as Justice R Regupathi (retd) to hand over all the records, reports of the investigating agencies, statements and the evidences collected to the State within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 

“On receipt of those documents, the State is directed to scrutinise the said reports of the investigating agencies, statements and evidences of Government officials and files and if prima facie case is found, then institute criminal prosecutions against all the public servants, Government officials and the persons concerned, under the penal provisions of law,” the judge added. On modifying the earlier interim order granted on March 12, 2015 and disposing the vacate stay petitions and stay petitions, Justice Subramaniam also directed the State to issue orders, vacating the respective government residential Bungalows allotted to the all the Commissions of Inquiry within a month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If at all, accommodation is required, the same shall be provided in the Government Office buildings suitably.” 

The stay on the functioning of the commission was granted on a plea moved by DMK president M Karunanidhi. It may be noted that Karunanidhi’s counsel during the earlier hearing had contended that in the absence of petitioner’s reply affidavit to the counter affidavits of the State on others, the consent for final hearing of the above Writ Petition cannot be given by the petitioner’s counsel, before the Judge who is allotted with Miscellaneous Portfolio.