Madras High CourtWP(MD)/11433/2025disposed of

V.Thangam v. The Director General Of Police

2025-04-29Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P.(MD)No.9649 of 2025 V.Thangam ... Petitioner versus

1. The Director General of Police, No.1, Kamarajar Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

2. The Director, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, 293, MKN Road, Aalanthoor, Chennai - 600 016.

3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department, 165G, Alagarkovil Main Road, Madurai - 625 002.

4. The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome Highway, Chennai.

5. The Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Integrated Registration Office, Rajakambeeram, Thirumogur Road, Y.Othakadai - 625 107.

1/6

6. The District Registrar (Madurai South), Mahal Registration Office, Palace Road, Madurai.

7. A.Panchatcharam

8. K.Pandi

9. S.P.Subramanian

10. Pandiyarajan ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to take action under Vigilance and Anti-Corruption against respondents 6 to 10 on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 11.03.2025 within the stipulated time period fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sundar For R1 to R3 : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor For R4 to R6 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam

ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court that the complaint of the petitioner dated 11.03.2025 has not been attended by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department.

2/6

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that one Pandiyarajan, Sub Registrar of Thirumangalam, has created forged documents in favour of the private respondents with the help of a Document Writer and therefore, the petitioner has lodged a complaint to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department, but, the same has not been attended. The learned counsel further submits that the said Sub Registrar is a corrupt person and he was trapped along with another Document Writer and a criminal case has been registered in Crime No.3 of 2025 for the offence under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the complaint of the petitioner was referred to the Inspector General of Registration, who, in turn, appointed an Enquiry Officer to look into this issue and depending upon the recommendations of the concerned Department, they would take further course of action. 3/6

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 4 to 6 also submits that the Inspector General of Registration has appointed the District Registrar, Madurai (South), as Enquiry Officer and depending on the outcome of the enquiry, they would recommend for further course of action, if any required.

5. Considering the said submissions, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, after concluding the enquiry, to take appropriate action not only departmentally and also criminally through the Vigilance and AntiCorruption Department, if it is required, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

29.04.2025 ogy NCC : Yes / No.

Index : Yes / No.

Internet:Yes / No.

4/6