(1.) THE petitioner herein seeks to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents -1 to 3 to initiate proper action immediately on the basis of his complaint dated 15.10.2010 as against the 4th respondent herein under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
(2.) THE petitioner herein, who is a suspended staff/Special Assistant of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption (DVAC) over a 'telephone tapping scandal', had submitted a complaint dated 15.10.2010 to the Government as well as the DVAC against the 4th respondent, who is an IPS Officer of 1988 Batch allotted to Tamil Nadu Cadre. The crux of the allegation in the complaint is that the 4th respondent, who is holding the post of Joint Director, DVAC, and vested with the responsibility of ensuring probity in public life and a corrupt -free administration, is possessing assets disproportionate to his known source of income to the tune of Rs.10 crores. The details of immovable properties said to have been purchased through such means are given in the complaint thus: -
(3.) MR .M.Radhakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would strongly submit that though the petitioner has made a written complaint dated 15.10.2010 giving exhaustive details of the movable and immovable assets said to have been acquired by the 4th respondent disproportionate to his known source of income, respondents -1 to 3 have neither registered a complaint nor transferred/suspended the 4th respondent from the present post. When the main purpose of the State Vigilance Commission is to advise the Government on the major administrative problems of prevention of corruption in public services in general and the manner in which individual cases of corruption that are brought to light should be dealt with, the utter failure on the part of respondents -1 to 3 to investigate into the complaint of the petitioner in detail would not only reflect the unfair and unreasonable attitude on their part but also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.