Disposed¶59

Kannan v. The Director

Madras HC29 Apr 2025WP(MD)/11700/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ of mandamus; Article 226; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) enquiry; complaint dated 29.11.2024; Sub Registrar Usilampatti; registration without layout approval; plots less than ten cents; Section 22A Tamil Nadu Registration Act; demand of illegal gratification; trap and arrest 28.01.2025; Crime No.1 of 2025; Section 7(a) Prevention of Corruption Act; suspension; Inspector General of Registration; District Registrar Madurai South Enquiry Officer; preliminary enquiry; disposed with direction.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department to conduct a preliminary enquiry and take action in accordance with law. ¶59

Kannan Vs The Director — Corruption | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department to conduct a preliminary enquiry and take action in accordance with law.

¶59

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing respondent No.3 (Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption) to conduct a proper enquiry on the petitioner's complaint dated 29.11.2024 (Ptn. No.16547/2024/REGN/MU) and take appropriate action against respondent No.5. +2 more

¶22

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department to conduct a preliminary enquiry and take action in accordance with law; no costs awarded.

¶60

Ratio / Principle

The materials placed before the Court prima facie make out a case that an Assistant was given charge as Sub Registrar, Usilampatti, enabling him to commit the offence, and that he registered other documents contrary to Section 22A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Act.

¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), B.PUGALENDHI, J.: Writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (R3) to conduct a proper enquiry on the petitioner's complaint dated 29.11.2024 (Ptn. No.16547/2024/REGN/MU, forwarded to the Inspector General of Registration on 27.12.2024) and to take action against the fifth respondent, Ziauddin, Sub Registrar, Usilampatti, who allegedly registered over 2000 documents notwithstanding the Division Bench ruling and S.22-A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Act (w.e.f. 20.10.2016) barring registration of plots without layout approval, and who allegedly demanded a huge amount from the petitioner. The VAC Department had treated the complaint as vague and forwarded it to the Inspector General of Registration, who appointed the District Registrar, Madurai South as Enquiry Officer on 18.12.2024; in the interim a trap on 28.01.2025 resulted in the Sub Registrar's arrest, registration of Crime No.1 of 2025 under S.7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and his suspension. Holding that the materials prima facie showed an Assistant given charge of the Sub Registrar's office enabled commission of the offence and registration of documents against S.22A, the Court disposed of the petition directing the VAC Department to conduct a preliminary enquiry and act in accordance with law. No costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 29.04.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

Kannan

... Petitioner

versus

The Director, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC)

¶11

No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur, Chennai – 600 016.

¶12

The Superintendent of Police, Southern Range, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Chennai – 600 016.

¶13

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, 1/165G, Alagar Kovil Main Road, Madurai – 625 002.

¶14

The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, O/o.Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Madurai Zone, Madurai.

¶15

Ziauddin

¶16

1/9

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

¶19

Dinesh

¶20

Edison

¶21

Rajendran ... Respondents

¶22

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent No.3 to conduct proper enquiry upon the petitioner's complaint dated 29.11.2024 in Petn. No.16547/2024/REGN/MU dated 27.12.2024 assigned by the 1^st respondent office and take appropriate action against the 5^th respondent within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vanchinathan For R1 to R3 : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor For R4 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam Government Advocate

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus directing the 3^rd respondent to conduct a proper enquiry upon the petitioner's complaint dated 29.11.2024 and take appropriate action against the 5^th respondent within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶26

2/9

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

¶29

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that without any layout approval, documents cannot be registered below 21 cents of lands. However, the 5^th respondent herein, by name, Ziauddin, the Sub Registrar of Usilampatti, has registered more than 2000 documents. The petitioner has also attempted to register a document. However, the 5^th respondent has demanded huge amount from the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner has collected the documents, which were registered by the 5^th respondent and lodged a complaint against him before the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department on 29.11.2024. But, the complaint of the petitioner has not been attended by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶30

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department submits that the complaint of the petitioner has been forwarded to the Inspector General of Registration on 27.12.2024 and they are awaiting the report from the Inspector General of Registration.

¶31

3/9

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

¶34

The learned Government Advocate submits that the Inspector of

¶35

General of Registration, has ordered for an enquiry, by appointing the District Registrar, Madurai South, as Enquiry Officer.

¶36

This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

¶37

The petitioner has produced 14 documents, which were registered in the Sub Registrar Office, Usilampatti, for two cents and three cents, etc. A Division Bench of this Court has passed an order that without any layout approval, documents cannot be registered for the plots less than ten cents. Based on the order of the Division Bench, the Government has also amended the provisions of the Registration Act by inserting Section 22A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Act with effect from 20.10.2016. Section 22A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Act is extracted as under:

¶38

“22-A. Documents registration of which is opposed

¶39

4/9

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

¶42

to public policy. -

¶43

(1) The State Government may, by notification in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, declare that the registration of any document or class of documents is opposed to public policy.

¶44

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the registering officer shall refuse to register any document to which a notification issued under sub-section (1) is applicable.”

¶45

The petitioner has lodged a complaint on 29.11.2024 to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department as well as the Inspector General of Registration. The complaint of the petitioner to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department was also forwarded to the Inspector General of Registration.

¶46

According to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department, they have treated the complaint as it is a vague complaint. The complaint of the petitioner dated 29.11.2024 was forwarded by the Vigilance and

¶47

5/9

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

¶50

Anti-Corruption Department to the Inspector General of Registration to ascertain the veracity of the complaint. The Inspector General of Registration has also ordered for an enquiry on the petitioner's complaint by appointing an Enquiry Officer, namely, the District Registrar, Madurai South, on 18.12.2024. Now, they are awaiting the report of the enquiry officer. Depending on the enquiry report, they would proceed against the erring officials.

¶51

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submits that they

¶52

have conducted trap as against the Sub Registrar on 28.01.2025 and also arrested him red-handed. A case was also registered as against the said Ziauddin in Crime No.1 of 2025 for the offence under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and he was placed under suspension.

¶53

The materials placed before this Court prima facie make out a case that an Assistant was given In-charge as a Sub Registrar, Usilampatti, enabling him to commit offence and accordingly, he has also registered other documents against the provisions under Section 22A of

¶54

6/9

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

W.P.(MD)No.11700 of 2025

¶57

the Tamil Nadu Registration Act.

¶58