Petitioner sought Writ of Mandamus mandating First Respondent to act on his 2017 representation concerning prosecution sanction. Court noted Respondents acted via Central Vigilance Commission and dismissed the petition as no inaction occurred.
This Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.01.2022
C O R A M
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.NO.671 OF 2018
G.Kalyana Raman
...Petitioner
Vs
6.Thiru.Sunil Paliwal, Principal Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. ...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, prayed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.05.2017 and its reminder
dated 30.10.2017, in respect of sanction to prosecute the offending officers and to take lawful action on the same.
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.05.2017 and its reminder dated 30.10.2017, in respect of sanction to prosecute the offending officers and to take lawful action on the same.
2.When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 would submit that, subsequent to the receipt of the complaint, the respondents 1 to 4 has taken action on the complaint of the petitioner. In this regard, the first respondent has filed his counter affidavit.
3.The relevant portion of the counter affidavit in extracted hereunder:
"It is respectfully submitted that Shri G.Kalyana Raman complaint dated 05.05.2017 was processed electronically in the Commission and forwarded electronically to CVO, D/o Agriculture Co-operation and Farmers Welfare (DAC&FW) for necessary action vide Commission OM No:75258/2017/Vigilance-9 dated 25.08.2017 as per complaint handling policy of the Central Vigilance Commission. Therefore,
2.It is further submitted that the complaint dated 05.05.2017 of Shri G.Kalyana Raman was processed electronically in the Commission and forwarded to CVO, DAC & FW for necessary action as per complaint handling policy of the Central Vigilance Commission. Therefore, Central Vigilance Commission has already taken action on the complaint of Shri G.Kalyana Raman (Petitioner of this case) and there is no inaction on the part of Central Vigilance Commission."
4.Considering the submission made by the learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and the averments made in the counter affidavit, this Court is of the view that since the complaint of the petitioner was considered by the respondents 1 to 4, no further order is required in the present Writ Petition and it is for the respondents to take action, if any illegality found during the investigation.
5.In the result, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-IX) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar
rst To: 1.The Central Vigilance Commissioner, The Government of India, Satarkta Bhavan, G.P.O Complex, Block A, INA, New Delhi - 110 023 2.The Chief Vigilance Officer The Government of India, Department of Agriculture, Co-operation and Farmers Welfare, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 001. 3.The Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training, North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 110 001. 4.The Director General of Audit (Central Expenditure), The Government of India, A.G.C.R. Building, Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi- 110 002. 5.The Chief Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
6.Thiru.Sunil Paliwal, Principal Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. +1cc to Mr.G.Baskaran, Advocate Sr.No.362
W.P.No.671 of 2018
PMK(CO) RVM(07/02/2022)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a Writ of Mandamus should be issued directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding sanction to prosecute offending officers.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
G.Kalyana Raman
The Central Vigilance Commissioner
The Chief Vigilance Officer
The Secretary to the Government of India
The Director General of Audit
The Chief Secretary to Government, Tamil Nadu
Krishnan Ramasamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
