CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has reserved its verdict without specifying a date in the petitions seeking registration of cases based on a letter sent by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) alleging irregularities in appointments and tender allocations in the Municipal Administration Department.
The ED had earlier sent a letter seeking registration of a case, alleging that bribes amounting to Rs 634 crore were collected in connection with 2,538 appointments, including posts such as Assistant Engineer, Junior Engineer, and Sanitary Inspector, in the Municipal Administration and Water Supply (MAWS) Department.
Based on this, a petition was filed before the Madras High Court by AIADMK MP IS Inbadurai and K Athinarayanan, president, Maruthu Senai Society of Madurai, seeking directions to the TN Director General of Police (DGP) to register a case.
When the two petitions came up for hearing before a Bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and G Arul Murugan, Advocate General PS Raman pointed out that out of 32 cases, 18 had already been disposed of. He also stated that there were two murder cases and one attempted murder case against the petitioner.
The petitioner alleged that cases were registered against him only after filing the present petition. However, the Chief Justice observed that cases had been pending since 2013 and remarked that doubts arose regarding the petitioner’s authenticity.
Senior counsel V Raghavachari, appearing for Inbadurai, argued that based on the evidence sent by the Enforcement Directorate in its letter, directions should be issued to register FIRs in corruption cases and that there was no necessity for a preliminary enquiry.
Enforcement Directorate counsel Ramesh stated that FIRs should be registered on the basis of the materials provided by them.
He stated that information had been sent indicating that several persons were selected even before the official results of recruitment examinations were announced in the Municipal Administration department. There were also WhatsApp messages indicating that several lakh rupees had been collected from the candidates. The CJ cautioned that if FIRs were registered without conducting a preliminary enquiry, the accused could seek quashing of the cases on that ground, which could result in the cases being dismissed.
Appearing for the State government, Advocate General PS Raman submitted that the ED’s letter had already been forwarded to the State and permission had been granted for investigation by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC). A detailed enquiry had been ordered, with a time limit of 120 days for completion.
He stated that action had already been initiated even before the present petitions were filed and that no one could seek a mandamus directing registration of FIRs.
Appearing for the DVAC, senior counsel NR Elango submitted that the petitions were based on unofficial documents and that a detailed enquiry had already commenced. He pointed out that DVAC rules mandate a preliminary enquiry on complaints, and accordingly, such enquiries were being conducted in all cases.
In the present matter, letters had been sent to departments concerned seeking documents, and a thorough, proper investigation would be completed, and a report submitted to the authorities.
Senior counsel Vikram Choudhary, appearing for the Tamil Nadu DGP, submitted that there was no scope for interference by private parties in matters of the present nature. He questioned the locus standi of the petitioners, stating that the investigation was being conducted lawfully and that the petitioners had no fundamental right to maintain the petitions.
After hearing all sides, the bench reserved its judgment without specifying a date.