Back
Cracks Down: Registry Ordered to Number Explosive Plea Against TVK Chief Vijay
In a sharp procedural rebuke, the has directed its registry to number a contentious writ petition seeking criminal probes against TVK chief and Chief Minister-elect Chandrasekaran Joseph Vijay over alleged income suppression from Income Tax raids. The bench, led by Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, emphasized that deciding a case's , not for registry clerks.
This order comes as the third petition targeting discrepancies in Vijay's declared assets, following earlier pleas—one prompting response and notice to Vijay, another dismissed post-elections.
The Petition That Tested the Gates
Chennai resident M. Rajkumar filed the writ under , urging: - to launch prosecutions under and others based on search materials under , sworn statements, assessments, and penalty. - to register an FIR for IPC offences like , , and over unaccounted cash and concealed transactions. - IT officials to refer evidence to for probing and under and 3 .
The registry balked, refusing numbering over maintainability doubts , listing it in SR stage "."
Registry's Stubborn Stand Meets Judicial Fury
Petitioner's counsel, for , highlighted the standoff. No respondent arguments were heard, as the focus shifted to registry overreach.
The court traced a saga of resistance despite interventions: - : Registry can't wield judicial power to reject numbering. - Grievance Redressal Committee (per ): Number all orderly petitions "subject to maintainability," list before roster judge. - : endorsed numbering first, court decides later. - Registrar General's Circular (): Explicit ban on refusals.
" We are surprised to note that still the Registry is continuing with the practice ," the bench noted, calling it a violation of settled law.
Breaking Down the Legal Wall
The judges clarified: Registries scrutinize , not merits. Doubts? Add endorsement " " and flag for the roster judge with objections .
This aligns precedents distinguishing administrative scrutiny from judicial review, ensuring access to justice under without gatekeeping.
Key Observations from the Bench
"The High Court Registry could not have exercised such judicial power to answer the maintainability of the petition, when the same was in the realm of the Court."(Citing P. Surendran)
"Registry is bound to number all the petitions, if the papers are otherwise in order and list the same before the Court holding the roster, under the caption ' '."
"It is for the Court to decide on maintainability of the case and if found maintainable, then to consider the case on merits."
A Procedural Win with Broader Ripples
The court ordered: " Number the above writ petition with an endorsement '' and list... separately under the caption '' ." Registrar General to circulate widely.
For litigants, it streamlines filings, curbing delays. For Vijay's case, it paves the way for merits review amid election-season scrutiny. Future registries ignore at their peril, as this reinforces courts' monopoly on judicial calls.
