Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.06.2023 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam Rep. by its Organisation Secretary R.S.Bharathi M.P.

DMK Head Quarters Anna Arivalayam 367 & 369, Anna Salai Petitioner in Chennai 600 018.

..

both W.Ps.

Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Chief Secretary Fort St. George, Secretariat Respondent-1 in Chennai 600 009.

..

both W.Ps.

Mohan Pyare, IAS ..

Respondent-2 in WP No.868/18 V.K.Jeyakodi, IAS ..

Respondent-2 in WP No.20981/17 The Tamil Nadu State Vigilance Commission Represented by its Commissioner Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

The Director of Vigilance and Anti Corruption rep. by its Director No.293, M.K.N. Road Alandur Chennai 600 016.

The Secretary to Governor Governor's Secretariat Raj Bhavan Respondents 3-5 Chennai.

..

in both WPs.

Prayer: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking (i) a writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in G.O.Rt.No.102, Public (Special A) Department dated 08.01.2018 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same; and (ii) a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to G.O.Rt.No.2720, Public (Special A) Department, dated 02.08.2017 issued by the first respondent appointing the second respondent as the Tamil Nadu State Vigilance Commissioner and quash the same and consequently, direct the first respondent to treat the office of the third respondent as 'integrity institution' by extending the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vineet Narain v.

Union of India reported in (1998) 1 SCC 226; PJ Thomas case reported in 2011 (4) SCC page 1 and the framework of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 to the third respondent and further direct the first respondent to appoint a Vigilance Commissioner after a fair, reasonable and transparent consultative process treating the office of the third respondent as an integrity institution on the basis of guidelines relating to the constitution, appointment, terms and conditions of service, functions, powers, procedure for removal, expenses and filing of annual report and infrastructure frame by this Hon'ble Court.

For the Petitioner in both WPs.

: Mr.R.Girirajan For the Respondents in both WPs.

: Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for Respondents 1 & 4 No appearance - for Respondents 2, 3 & 5

ORDER

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by efflux of time, the relief claimed does not survive.

2. In the light of that, these writ petitions stand disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, WMP Nos.1042, 1043 and 1049 of 2018 and 21866, 21867, 22989 and 23712 of 2017 are closed.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.) 16.06.2023 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No kpl

To

1. The Chief Secretary State of Tamil Nadu Fort St. George, Secretariat Chennai 600 009.

2. The Commissioner Tamil Nadu State Vigilance Commission Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

3. The Director of Vigilance and Anti Corruption No.293, M.K.N. Road Alandur Chennai 600 016.

4. The Secretary to Governor Governor's Secretariat Raj Bhavan Chennai.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.

(kpl) W.P.Nos.868 of 2018 & 20981 of 2017 16.06.2023