Chennai: The Madras high court has ordered maintenance of status quo in the matter relating to the enquiry being conducted by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption into the alleged irregularities in the construction of new secretariat by the then DMK government.
A division bench comprising Justices Huluvadi G.Ramesh and K.Kalyanasundaram posted to October 22, further hearing of the appeal filed by DMK president M.K.Stalin and ordered maintenance of status quo till then.
The effect of the order of status quo is the status with regard to the enquiry as on today should be maintained.
In his appeal, Stalin sought to set aside an order of the single judge, which directed the Justice R.Regupathy Commission of Inquiry to hand over the records to the state government, which in turn scrutinize the same and if prima facie case was found, then institute criminal prosecution.
Senior Counsel Wilson said registration of preliminary enquiry itself was the first stage of enquiry. Because of the impugned order, the state government has set the law in motion. The appellant apprehends anything may happen in another 10 days. A case may be registered since the preliminary enquiry has already commenced, he added and prayed the court to stay the operation of the order of the single judge.
In his appeal, Stalin submitted that the single judge has not considered that upon the death of a petitioner, a petition abates and no further adjudication can be made in the said petition, especially when the dispute in the petition was personal, and it cannot be carried on by impleading his legal heirs.
The single judge was not correct therefore in referring to the interim order dated August 3, 2018 which became non-est in law upon the dismissal of the petition on August 20 after the death of the petitioner (the then DMK president M.Karunanidhi) in the impugned order.
The single judge has not considered that when a petition was being dismissed as withdrawn, there was no scope for making observations in the nature of directions in the said petition, which affect the rights of the appellant, he added.
