BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated : 06.01.2026

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA

Thavamani

Rep by her Power Agent,

S.Chirstopher ... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Director,

Directorate of Vigilance and Anticorruption(DVAC)

No.293, MKN Road,

Alandur,

Chennai – 600 016.

2.The Commissioner,

Tamil Nadu Vigilance Commission,

Chennai – 600 016.

3.The Superintendent of Police,

Southern Range,

Vigilance and Anticorruption Department,

Chennai – 600 016. ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition Criminal is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to forthwith conduct an independent, proper and effective enquiry upon the petitioner's complaints dated 10.06.2025, 23.07.2025 and 28.10.2025 and to take appropriate action against all erring officials and private individuals involved in the fraudulent transactions in accordance with law.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Raja For Respondents : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to conduct an independent, proper and effective enquiry on the petitioner's complaints dated 10.06.2025, 23.07.2025 and 28.10.2025 and to take appropriate action against all erring officials and private individuals involved in the fraudulent transactions in accordance with law.

2.The petitioner is the absolute owner and is in lawful possession of 43.5 cents of land in Adukam Village, Kodaikanal Taluk. The petitioner states that her husband purchased the said property under sale deed No.1179 of 1997 from a Power Agent. Thereafter, the petitioner's husband settled the property in favour of the petitioner vide Settlement Deed registered as Document No.1238 of 2009. The petitioner states that while so, the Power Agent in collusion with the Sub Registrar and Revenue Officials, fraudulently executed sale deed Document No.1475 of 1997, introduced fabricated survey numbers and false schedules, thereby enabling an illegal conveyance covering an inflated extent of 294.06 cents far beyond the authorised GPA extent. The petitioner states that based on the forged documents, fraudulent pattas and encumbrance entries were created by manipulating survey records, which directly prejudiced the petitioner's lawful title and possession. The petitioner states that on discovery of the aforesaid fraud during mutation proceedings in the year 2023, she approached the Crime Branch, Land Grabbing Cell, Dindigul. In respect of cognizable offences, no action was taken. The petitioner states that she also initiated criminal proceedings to protect her rights. The petitioner states that substantiating the petitioner's case, one of the co-purchasers in the impugned transactions categorically admitted before the criminal Court, that no consideration passed under the illegal transactions and that the transactions were effected by suppressing the limited scope of the GPA. The petitioner under the circumstances, lodged a detailed complaint before the Directorate of Vigilance and Anticorruption on 10.06.2025, 28.07.2025 and 28.10.2025, against the fraud committed by the public servants and the systematic manipulation of public records. However, the respondents merely forwarded the complaints without conducting any independent verification or enquiry. Under these circumstances, the petitioner was constrained to file the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable since the petitioner has an alternate remedy under Section 175(3) of BNSS, before the jurisdictional court.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor relied on the judgment reported in 2015(6) SCC 287 in support of his submission.

4.Heard both sides. Perused the record.

5.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs. State of U.P and others reported in 2015(6) SCC 287, held as follows:

“24. Regard being had to the aforesaid