SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Mad) 813

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P. SIVASUBRAMANIAM
Dr.C.Gomathi - Appellant
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department & Others - Respondents
W.P.No.36690 of 2004 and W.P.M.P.No.44047 of 2004
Decided On : 10 May 2005

Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioner:P. Veeraraghavan Senior Advocate for C.S. Karnan. For The Respondents:R1 to R4, A.L. Somayaji, Addl. Advocate General Assisted by D. Krishna Kumar Special Govt. Pleader, S. Venkatesh Special Govt. Pleader & R. Vijayakumar Government Advocate E. Sampath Kumar, G.A., R5, N. Jothi for L.P. Shanmughasundaram, R6, P. Sundaram Government Advocate, R7, P. Chandrasekaran, Advocate.

Allegation of sexual abuse and torture on the basis of affidavits against Health Minister.

Headnote:Constitution of India-Article 226-Complaint by a lady doctor against Health Minister-Sought writ of mandamus for directing investigation by CBI-Held, instant case is against a State Minister-Such investigation has to be done by an investigating agency in a comprehensive manner-for ensuring public confidence in investigation enquiry to be conducted by an independent committee of persons appointed by court.

Judgment :-

The petitioner prays for a Mandamus to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) to register a case on the basis of the representations made by the petitioner to the second respondent on 22.9.2003 and subsequent representations dated 9.12.2003, 5.1.2004, 19.1.2004, 30.7.2004, 11.11.2004, 27.11.2004 and 29.11.2004 to various authorities with copies to the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, and to investigate the case and to submit a report to this Court within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The petitioner is a Doctor in the service of the State Government. Having regard to the nature of the prayer in the writ petition, namely, to entrust the complaint for investigation by C.B.I. and the nature of the relief which is being finally granted under this order, I do not propose to deal in a detailed manner, the pleadings, arguments, materials and various rulings submitted by both sides. I propose to restrict only to a gist of the pleadings and submissions made by both sides in order to appreciate the essentials of the complaint and the defence by the persons accused of various commissions and omissions. I am also not recording any of my impressions on the contentions by both sides, so that the proposed enquiry should not be diverted or prejudiced.

3. According to the petitioner, she belongs to Schedule Caste community and with great difficulty, she completed her medical course in the year 1984. Her husband died in a road accident on 6.6.1989. She later underwent training in JIPMER, Pondicherry and in the same year, she joined the Government service. In the affidavit, she has given details relating to her service particulars and postings in different places. She alleges that she was transferred to various places in an unreasonable manner and in the year 2000, she was posted as Tutor in Government Kilpauk Medical College Hospital (K.M.C.H.) from 7.7.2000 and thereafter as Tutor in Madras Medical College Hospital and again to K.M.C.H. on 24.7.2003 as Tutor and as Assistant Professor.

4. According to her, the architect of such frequent transfers was the fifth respondent, who is the Minister for Health and Family Welfare Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu. According to her, ever since he came to know that she is a widow, he tried to have immoral relationship with her on several occasions, which attempts were constantly resisted by her. She would further state that the fifth respondent used to visit K.M.C.H. at 6.00 a.m. in the early morning frequently and would sit in the Dean's room mainly for the purpose of threatening her. She further states that on 19.9.2003, the fifth respondent, to the shock of everyone, came directly to the Labour Ward where she was working and started shouting at her in the presence of many persons. Therefore, on 22.9.2003, she sent a telegram to the Hon'ble Chief Minister and other authorities including the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, complaining about the mental and sexual tortures made by the fifth respondent and his close friends. After the telegram, though the fifth respondent stopped visiting the hospital, however, continued to issue instructions to the Dean to transfer her to some other place. This resulted in the Dean and other staff members allegedly indulging in torturing her and creating false evidence against her. In order to avoid and to escape from the fifth respondent, she had applied for earned leave for 71 days from 4.11.2003 to 13.1.2004. As a result of the complaint lodged by her, she was ill-treated by the Dean, the sixth respondent and the Deputy Commissioner Kamala, who came to the Labour Ward and shouted at her forcibly pushing her out of the ward.

5. The petitioner states that on 10.12.2003, another transfer order was issued, transferring her from K.M.C.H. to the Government Hospital at Nagapattinam. As she was on leave, the transfer order was affixed on the door of the petitioner's house, which was noticed by the petitioner only on 3.1.2004









































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top