The main legal point established is that the registration of a complaint as a suo motu writ petition requires the approval of the Chief Justice and must comply with the prescribed procedure, including adherence to the Roster and directives of the Chief Justice.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 to take appropriate action against the Respondent No.6 and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.)

Paresh Upadhyay, J.

1. Registrar (Judicial) of this Court has filed this suo motu writ petition, in his official capacity on 22.03.2022. The memo of this writ petition reads as under:-

“MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS, MADURAI BENCH

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.P(MD)No.5237 of 2022

SUO MOTU WP.(MD) NO. 5237 OF 2022

The Registrar(Judicial),

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

.. Petitioner

-Vs-

1. The Secretary to the Government, Registration Department, Chennai.

2. The District Collector, Thanjavur District.

3. Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department,

Santhome High Road, Chennai – 28.

4. The Director,

Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Alandur, Chennai – 600 016.

5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,

Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Thanjvaur.

6. R.Chandrasekaran,

Assistant, Office of the District Registrar, Registration Department, Pattukottai – 614 601.

A letter has been addressed to the Honourable Mr.Justice S.M.Subramaniam by one Packim Sikkandar residing at Valar Nagar, Uthangudi, Madurai – 625 017 (Mobile No. 9445528836) wherein shocking revelations have been made as to the possession of disproportionate asset by a Government servant namely R.Chandrasekaran, Assistant working in the Registration Department, Office of the District Registrar, Department of Registration, Pattukkottai – 614 601. In the complaint submitted by the petitioner all details regarding to the purchase of the property, document number, date of registration, value of the properties have been furnished. However, the Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Thanjavur, has not taken action stating the reason, that the said Packiam Sikkandar has sent a copy of the same to this Court.

In view of the details provided in the complaint, the Honourable Court has directed the Registry treat this complaint as a Suo-Motu Writ Petition to initiate appropriate action in the interest of justice. As per the direction Suo-Motu Writ Petition is registered.

In the above circumstances, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 to take appropriate action against the Respondent No.6 and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

Dated at Madurai on this 22nd day of March 2022

Sd/-

Registrar (Judicial) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court”

2. This petition was filed on the orders of Hon'ble Judge who had received the complaint, on which, the following order was passed by His Lordship, on administrative side, on 22.03.2022:-

“This Court received a letter from one Packiam Sikkandar residing at Valar Nagar, Uthangudi, Madurai – 625 107 (Mobile No. 9445528836) and certain shocking revelations are made regarding disproportionate asset of a Government servant working in Registration Department namely R.Chandrasekaran, Assistant, Office of the District Registrar, Department of Registration, Pattukottai – 614 601.

2. The proforma of the complaint submitted by the petitioner reveals that all details regarding to the purchase of the property, document number, date of registration, value of the properties are furnished. However, the Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Thanjavur, has not taken action and by citing the said reason, the said Pakkiam Sikkandar sent the copy of the same to this Court.

3. In view of the details provided in the complaint, it is necessary for this Court