AIADMK govt. gave me a clean chit, DMK govt. cannot reverse it, Velumani tells HC

Bench adjourns the hearing of two cases by four weeks

June 21, 2021 11:10 pm | Updated 11:12 pm IST - CHENNAI

Former Minister S.P. Velumani on Friday argued before the Madras High Court that the previous All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) government had dropped all proceedings against him in a case alleging irregularities in the award of corporation contracts and therefore the present Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) regime could not take a different stand.

Appearing before Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi said that non-governmental organisation Arappor Iyakkam and DMK Rajya Sabha member R.S. Bharathi had moved the High Court in 2018 seeking a Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) probe into alleged irregularities in civil contracts awarded by the Greater Chennai Corporation and the Coimbatore Corporation.

Passing interim orders on those petitions in 2019, a Bench led by Justice M. Sathyanarayanan (since retired) ordered a preliminary inquiry and specifically named Superintendent of Police R. Ponni to head the probe. Accordingly, the officer conducted a preliminary inquiry and submitted an exhaustive report to then DVAC Director on December 18, 2019 stating that no case had been made out for registration of a First Information Report (FIR).

The DVAC Director approved the report and forwarded it to the Vigilance Commissioner on January 13, 2020. The Commissioner too endorsed the report on January 18, 2020. Thereafter, on January 22, 2020, the government accepted the report and dropped all proceedings on the complaints against the Minister. “Now, merely because the government is changed, it can’t make any difference,” Mr. Rohatgi said.

He claimed that nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present petitions pending since 2018.

Not in agreement with him, advocate V. Suresh, representing Jayaram Venkatesan of Arappor Iyakkam, said the issue was not as simple as it was being projected before the court and that he would prefer to argue the case whenever physical hearing resumes since the issue involves reliance on voluminous documents.

Accepting his request, the judges adjourned the hearing of the two cases by four weeks.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.