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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3950

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT 
G.K.Ilanthiraiyan, J.
Dr. C. Vijayabaskar - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Chief Secretary - Respondent
W.P(MD)No.4379 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.4113, 4114 & 4115 of 2023
Decided On : 20-01-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.N.Nithyaesh Natraj, for Mr.Vaibhav R.Venkatesh
For the Respondent:Mr.Veera Kathiravan, Additional Advocate General, Assisted by Mr.D.Gandhi Raj, Special Government Pleader

The Commission's failure to provide notice and an opportunity to be heard violated natural justice, rendering its findings invalid.

Headnote:(A) Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 - Sections 8B and 8C - Writ Petition challenging the Commission's report regarding the former Health Minister's role in the treatment of the late Chief Minister - The Commission failed to provide notice and opportunity for hearing to the petitioner, violating principles of natural justice. (Paras 3, 17, 26)

(B) Natural Justice - The Commission's recommendations are not binding and must adhere to procedural fairness, including the right to be heard. (Paras 7, 24)

(C) Maintainability of Writ Petition - The Writ Petition is maintainable as the report adversely affects the petitioner's reputation, warranting judicial review. (Paras 12, 26)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a former Health Minister, challenged the Commission's report that found fault with him regarding the treatment of the late Chief Minister, alleging violations of the Commissions of Inquiry Act.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Commission's report and subsequent government order lacked due process and violated the petitioner's rights.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Writ Petition was maintainable and if the Commission's findings could be interfered with.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Commission's failure to provide notice and an opportunity to be heard rendered its findings invalid, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to natural justice principles.

Result: Writ Petition allowed, Commission's report quashed.

ORDER :

G.K.Ilanthiraiyan, J.

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Hon'ble Thiru.Justice A.Arumughaswamy Commission of Inquiry report dated 23.08.2022 insofar as the petitioner is concerned in paragraph Nos.39.1 to 39.7 and 47.28 thereby the petitioner was found fault with and suggested for investigation is to be ordered.

2.The petitioner is the former Health Minister of the State of Tamil Nadu. He was Minister under the regime of 'the late Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu Selvi.J.Jayalalithaa' (in short hereinafter referred to as 'the late Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu'). While she was functioning as a Chief Minister, she fell ill and was admitted into a private hospital on 22.09.2016. While she was taking treatment, she died on 05.12.2016. The respondent passed an order in G.O.Ms.No.817, Public (S.C) Department dated 25.09.2017 thereby appointing the Commission to inquire into the demise of the late Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu headed by 'the Hon'ble Thiru.Justice A.Arumughaswamy' (in short hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission'), former Judge of this Court.Further, another Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.829, Public (S.C) Department, dated 27.09.2017, thereby ordered the Commission to inquire into the circumstances and situation leading to the hospitalization of the late Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu on 22.09.2016 and subsequent treatment provided till her unfortunate demise on 05.12.2016. In pursuant to the said Government Orders, the Commission assumed charge on 30.09.2017 and had examined 151 witnesses as Commission Witnesses in which the petitioner was examined as Commission Witness No.146 on 21.01.2019. After completion of the enquiry, the Commission submitted a report on 23.08.2022. Aggrieved by the recommendations/observations and findings of the Commission's report insofar as the petitioner is concerned, the Commission's report is under challenge in this Writ Petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was examined as a Commission Witness ie., C.W.146. However, the findings and observations of the Commission's report prejudicially affected his reputation and caused serious prejudice in the minds of the general public. It is a complete violation of mandatory statutory provisions of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (in short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1952') and the Commissions of Inquiry (Central) Rules, 1972 (in short hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1972). In order to proceed against the person whose reputation will likely be affected as a result of inquiry before it, a notice in terms of Section 8B of the Act, 1952 will have to be mandatorily issued to such person. Further Section 8C of the Act, 1952 embodies the principles of natural justice. The Commission failed to issue notice to the petitioner in terms of Section 8B of the Act, 1952 and the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing as contemplated under Section 8C of the Act, 1952. Therefore, suggesting to conduct an investigation is wholly without jurisdiction of the Commission and recommendation for initiation of appropriate action cannot be sustained that too without giving reasonable opportunity to adduce evidence on behalf of the petitioner. Further, the Commission came to the conclusion without any material and on the deposition of the petitioner itself concluded that the petitioner was found fault with and investigation is to be ordered. In fact, the private hospital in which the late Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu was admitted for treatment filed an application to constitute a Medical Board in A.No. 213 of 2022. It was not considered and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India passed an order in SLP Civil No.10189-10190 of 2019, requesting the Director, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi to nominate a panel of Doctors, specialists in the fields of treatment of the ailments as suffered by the late Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.

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