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
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.
The Commission's failure to provide notice and an opportunity to be heard violated natural justice, rendering its findings invalid.
Individuals must be given a fair opportunity to defend their reputation in inquiries where their conduct is questioned.
Point of law: Merely because the petition was maintainable and required lengthy hearing would not automatically invite an interim order. Passing of an interim order and that too in case of such a sen....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.