C. Nagappan, J. And M. Sathyanarayanan, J.

The appellant is the writ petitioner and he made a challenge to the Final Opportunity Notice dated 25.04.2012 issued by the respondent calling upon the petitioner to offer his explanation as to the possession of assets and pecuniary resources, which has been held as disproportionate to his known sources of income. The writ petition, after contest, was dismissed on 26.06.2012 and aggrieved by the same, the present writ appeal is filed by the writ petitioner.

2. Facts leading to the filing of this writ appeal, as culled out from the affidavit filed in support of the main writ petition as well as the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent, are as follows:-

a) In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it has been averred that the writ petitioner/appellant is the Deputy General Secretary of the DMK Party and a sitting Member of Legislative Assembly elected from the Katpadi Assembly Constituency and he was the Minister for Public Works Department and Law Department during the period 2006-2011. The writ petitioner/appellant further averred that ever since the present ruling party came into power, the party leaders and important functionaries belonged to his party were targeted by filing false and frivolous cases, namely, land grabbing case and disproportionate assets case, etc. Likewise, a case has been registered by the respondent against the writ petitioner/ appellant in Crime No.17 of 2011 for the commission of offences under Sections 13(2) r/w 13 (1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short 'PC Act') for possessing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income during the period from 2006-2011.

b) Pursuant to the registration of the above said case, searches were conducted at his residence and at the business premises of his son and the search failed to yield any documents or materials suggesting that the writ petitioner/appellant had amassed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.

c) The respondent sent a notice dated 11.03.2012 along with a list of questionnaire calling upon the writ petitioner/appellant to divulge certain information and the said questionnaire consisted of 66 questions.

d) The writ petitioner/appellant challenged the said notice by filing W.P.No.8391 of 2012 and the same was opposed by the respondent by filing counter. The said writ petition was taken up for final disposal and the learned Judge (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod K.Sharma), vide order dated 10.04.2012, after taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor that the impugned questionnaire is voluntary and it is for the petitioner either to answer or not to answer it, has observed that in the event of the petitioner not answering the questionnaire, no adverse action will be taken and it will be for the investigating agency to proceed with the investigation strictly as per the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The writ petition was disposed of recording the said submission of the learned Public Prosecutor.

e) After the disposal of the said writ petition, the respondent issued the impugned Final Opportunity Notice dated 25.04.2012 enclosing statements I to VI and stated that on the basis of the above statements, the quantum of disproportionate assets/pecuniary resources with the writ petitioner/appellant and his wife, namely, Tmt.Santhakumari, on his behalf, being the dependent, as on 31.03.2009 were worked out at Rs.1,40,74,174/-. Therefore, the respondent called upon the writ petitioner/appellant to furnish his explanation to the above said statements on or before 10.05.2012 failing which it will be construed that he has no valid explanation to offer and the case will be finalised on the basis of the information available with the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (in short 'DVAC').

f) The writ petitioner/appellant, in response to the said notice, sent an interim reply dated 09.05.2012 stating that