Disposed¶35

J.Jayakumar v. The Director

Madras HC11 Feb 2026WP Crl./1512/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Madras High Court; WP Crl. No. 1512 of 2025; writ of mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; Vigilance and Anti-Corruption complaint; representation dated 22.03.2025; Regional Transport Officer Kallakurichi; Ref.No.3074/2025/TPT/KLK; Joint Transport Commissioner Guindy; Deputy Transport Commissioner Villupuram Zone Enquiry Officer; six-month enquiry deadline; petitioner informed of outcome; writ petition disposed of; Justice M. Nirmal Kumar; decision dated 11-02-2026.

What did the court decide?

With the above direction (enquiry by the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Villupuram Zone, participation of the petitioner, completion preferably within six months and communication of outcome to the petitioner), the Writ Petition stands disposed of. ¶35

J.Jayakumar Vs The Director — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the first and second respondents (Director, VAC and SP, North Range, VAC) to register the case and investigate the petitioner's representation dated 22.03.2025 against the fourth respondent. +1 more

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Villupuram Zone is directed to enquire the petitioner during the enquiry and take appropriate action in the manner known to law.

¶34

Key takeaways

The enquiry shall be completed preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, and the petitioner shall be informed about the outcome of the enquiry.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (M. Nirmal Kumar, J.) disposed of WP Crl. No. 1512 of 2025 on 11-02-2026. The petitioner, whose complaint dated 22.03.2025 to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption authorities against the fourth respondent drew no action, sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 directing the Director, VAC and the Superintendent of Police, North Range, VAC to register and investigate the complaint. Per the Government Advocate's status report dated 28.01.2026, the complaint had been forwarded to the Commissioner, Transport and Road Safety Commissionerate, Chennai (Ref.No.3074/2025/TPT/KLK dated 13.03.2025), and an interim reply confirmed that the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Villupuram Zone was appointed Enquiry Officer. The petitioner expressed apprehension that the enquiry might be closed behind his back. Directing that the petitioner be heard during the enquiry, the court instructed the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Villupuram Zone to enquire him and take appropriate action in the manner known to law, complete the enquiry preferably within six months from receipt of a copy of the order, inform the petitioner of the outcome, and disposed of the writ petition accordingly.

¶1

WP Crl. No. 1512 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR WP CRL. NO. 1512 OF 2025

¶6

J.Jayakumar S/o.Jayaramakrishnan, No.6, Sakthioli Nagar, Ammapettai Post, Chidambaram Taluk.

¶7

Petitioner(s)

¶8

¶9

The Director, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Alandur, Chennai - 16.

¶10

2.The Superintendent of Police, North Range, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Chennai - 16.

¶11

3.The Regional Transport Officer, Kallakurichi, Villupuram District.

¶12

4.R.Gopinath, S/o.Ramalingam, No.3, Nalla Thanneer Kulam, Anaivari, Erumbur, Cuddalore District.

¶13

Respondent(s)

¶14

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, 1950 praying to issue a Wit of Mandamus, directing the 1^st and 2^nd Respondents to register the case and investigate the same by considering petitioner’s representation dated 22.03.2025 against the 4^th Respondent.

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ragul Kousik

¶18

WP Crl. No. 1512 of 2025

¶19

For Respondents - Mr.S.Udayakumar 1 & 2 : Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner had sent a complaint to the Vigilance and Anti-corruption

¶22

on 22.03.2025, but no action taken. Hence, filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the first and second respondents to register the case and investigate the same by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 22.03.2025 against the fourth respondent.

¶23

2.The contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that petitioner is a business man and involved in real estate and finance business. The fourth respondent approached the petitioner with a proposal for entering into a business association and the petitioner not gaining confidence on the fourth respondent declined the business proposal. Thereafter the fourth respondent started exerting pressure on the petitioner to accept the proposal through common friends and later warned him using force. The third respondent abusing his official position by accepting illegal gratification from various members of the public and also having association with several driving schools, enriched himself and the fourth respondent colluded with third respondent got enriched,

¶24

2/6

¶25

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

¶26

WP Crl. No. 1512 of 2025

¶27

purchased a vacant land measuring 30 cents in his wife’s name at Sethiyathope. Thereafter, a complaint lodged for misconduct and misdeeds. The complaint was acknowledged on 13.03.2025, the petitioner summoned for enquiry. The petitioner produced all relevant documents and also gave his explanation, thereafter too, no action taken.

¶28

3.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 filed status report dated 28.01.2026 and submitted that the complaint of the petitioner forwarded to the Commissioner, Transport and Road Safety Commissionerate, Chennai in Ref.No.3074/2025/TPT/KLK, dated 13.03.2025. Thereafter sought for status report and interim reply received on 08.01.2026 from the Joint Transport Commissioner (Admin), Commissionerate of Transport and Road Safety, Guindy, Chennai on 31.12.2025 confirming that Deputy Transport Commissioner, Villupuram Zone appointed as Enquiry Officer to enquire the complaint of the petitioner and submit a report.

¶29

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the enquiry to be conducted properly and the petitioner is ready to appear before the enquiry officer to give his explanation and submit documents, available with him. His only apprehension is that behind his back enquiry not to be closed.

¶30

3/6

¶31

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

¶32

WP Crl. No. 1512 of 2025

¶33

5.In view of the above, the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Villupuram

¶34

Zone is directed to enquire the petitioner during enquiry and take appropriate action in the manner known to law. The enquiry to be completed preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the petitioner to be informed about the outcome of the enquiry.

¶35

6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶36

11-02-2026

¶37

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order rsi

¶38

4/6

¶39

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

¶40

WP Crl. No. 1512 of 2025