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

2011 Supreme(Mad) 4649

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. MURUGESAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. SASIDHARAN
Vijayalakshmi Shanmugam & Another
Versus
Chief Secretary & Others
W.P.Nos.18277 & 18883 of 2011
Decided On :Decided on : 01-12-2011

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner - Manikandan Vathan Chettiar, R. Viduthalai, Senior Counsel for M. Dhandapani, Advocates.
For the Respondents - A. Navaneethakrishnan, Advocate General assisted by S. Venkatesh, Govt. Pleader, A. Navaneethakrishnan, Advocate General assisted by R. Vijayakumar, Addl. Government Pleader.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry must be supported by justifiable grounds and materials, and the appointment should not be arbitrary or mala fide. The judgment emphasizes the necessity of materials before appointing a Commission of Inquiry and rejects allegations of bias and malice in law against the one-man Commission of Inquiry.

Headnote:

G.O.Ms.No.530 - Appointment of Commission of Inquiry - Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The judgment discusses the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry to investigate alleged irregularities in the construction of the New Secretariat Complex in Omandurar Government Estate, Chennai. The court analyzes the provisions of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, and the legal principles related to the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry, including the necessity of materials and the absence of bias. The court concludes that the appointment of the Commission of Inquiry was justified based on the materials available to the government and dismisses the writ petitions challenging the appointment.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petitions question the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry to investigate alleged irregularities in the construction of the New Secretariat Complex in Omandurar Government Estate, Chennai. The petitioners raise concerns about the appointment of a retired Judge as the one-man Commission of Inquiry and allege bias and malice in law.

Finding of the Court:

The court finds that the appointment of the Commission of Inquiry was justified based on the materials available to the government. The court dismisses the writ petitions challenging the appointment and allows the appointment of another individual as the one-man commission, if desired by the respondent State.

Issues: The court considers the following issues: (i) Consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court before appointing a retired Judge as the one-man Commission of Inquiry, (ii) Validity of the impugned order due to a wrong address of the appointee, (iii) Necessity of materials before appointing the Commission of Inquiry, (iv) Bias of the one-man Commission of Inquiry, and (v) Allegations of arbitrariness, unfairness, and malice in law in the impugned order.

Ratio Decidendi: The court holds that consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court before appointing a retired Judge as the one-man Commission of Inquiry is not required by the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952. The court also rejects the challenge to the impugned order based on a wrong address of the appointee, as it does not invalidate the order. The court emphasizes the necessity of materials before appointing a Commission of Inquiry and concludes that the appointment was justified based on the materials available to the government. The court rejects the allegations of bias and malice in law against the one-man Commission of Inquiry.

Final Decision: The court dismisses the writ petitions challenging the appointment of the Commission of Inquiry and allows the appointment of another individual as the one-man commission, if desired by the respondent State.

Judgment :-

D.MURUGESAN, J.

1. Both the writ petitions question the G.O.Ms.No.530, Public (Buildings) Department dated 22.6.2011 appointing a Commission of Inquiry to inquire into the causes and circumstances leading to certain alleged irregularities in the construction of the New Secretariat Complex in Omandurar Government Estate, Chennai. The Notification directed to be published in the said Government Order reads as under:-

“WHEREAS, it has been brought to the notice of the Government that there has been certain alleged irregularities like excess expenditure, irregularities causing loss to the exchequer, whether all statutory approvals

AND WHEREAS, the Government of Tamil Nadu is of the opinion that it is necessary to appoint a Commission of Inquiry for the purpose of making an inquiry into a definite matter of public importance hereinafter specified;

NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (Central Act LX of 1952), the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby appoints a Commission of Inquiry consisting of a single member, namely, Honble Justice Thiru S.Thangaraj, Retired Judge of Madras High Court.

3. The terms of reference of the Commission of Inquiry shall be as follows, namely:-

a. To inquire into the causes and circumstances leading to the alleged irregularities like excess expenditure, irregularities causing loss to the exchequer, whether all statutory approvals and clearances were obtained, inordinate delay and deficiency in standards of construction in the construction of New Secretariat Complex at Omandurar Government Estate, Chennai-2;

b. To inquire whether there was any lapse or abuse of position on the part of the Government Officials/Public Servants;

c. if such allegations are proved true, then to suggest suitable ways and means to prevent such recurrences in future; and

d. To make appropriate recommendations as the commission deems fit.

4. The Commission will complete its inquiry and submit its report to the Government within a period of three months from the date of publication of this Notification in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette.

5. AND WHEREAS, the Government of Tamil Nadu are of the opinion, having regard to the nature of the inquiry to be made by the said Commission of Inquiry and other circumstances of the case, that all the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of Section 5 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (Central Act LX of 1952) shall be made applicable to the said Commission of Inquiry.

6. NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (Central Act LX of 1952), the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby directs that all the provisions of the said sub-sections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of the said Section 5 of the said Act shall apply to the said Commission of Inquiry.”

2. The following are some of the facts, as culled out from the petitions, leading to the present litigation. The Legislative Assembly Complex at Fort Saint George was constructed by the East India Company in the year 1640 AD. After independence, the building was used as the Legislative Assembly with its administrative wing. The D.M.K. political party formed the Government in the year 2006 and the Government identified the Omandurar Government Estate as the venue for the construction of New Secretariat and Legislative Assembly complex. The building was constructed in two blocks, namely, Block-A measuring 9.3 lakh sq.ft., consisting of 700 rooms to house the assembly hall, rooms for Honble Ministers, opposition leaders, Chief Secretary and all other Secretaries apart from a hall for the Legislative Council with a parking facility for 100 cars. Block-B, Administrative Wing, is an eight-storeyed building measuring 7.43 lakh sq.ft., including a convention hall with a seating capacity of 1200, guest house of 50 suites apart from the multi-level car parking facility for 700 cars

































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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