B JEGNATHAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for issue of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to appoint a Commission of Enquiry against the previous Government to find out irregularities, abuse of power, corruption, loss of revenue, under Section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952.

(2.) The petitioner, who is a practicing Advocate, has raised the following contentions in the affidavit filed in support of this petition;- He is filing this writ petition as a public interest litigation, since he feels that it is the duty of all the persons to help the Court to the best of their ability in ascertaining the truth and for moulding the appropriate relief. The accountability of the executive to the people through the judiciary cannot be set at naught by any self-induced doubts regarding the jurisdiction of the Court or the propriety of the Court to entertain matters raising questions of annihilations of constitutional values by the executive. After the death of the Ex-Chief Minister Thiru M.G. Ramachandran, a new Cabinet was formed under the head of Mrs. Janaki Ramacjandran for a short period. Because of the rivalry in the ruling A.I.A.D.M.K, party, Presidents Rule was imposed in the State and the Assembly was dissolved. Thereafter, the former Ministers and other members of the party gave open statements in all the newspapers regarding large corruption charges against each other. The Governor of Tamil Nadu found some illegalities and corruptions and took action against some of the Government Officials. After the recent elections, the present Chief Minister Thiru M. Karunanidhi presented the entire details of abuse of power, corruptions, fraud in the revenue of the Government before the Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner came to know about these details through the media, and finding that there were large scale corruptions during the term of the previous Ministry, the petitioner has come forward with this writ petition.

(3.) The petitioner contended that as a person interested in the welfare of the people of Tamil Nadu, he is entitled to maintain this writ petition. He relied on certain observations of the Supreme Court in S.P.Gupta v. President of India, AIR 1982 SC 149 and submitted that where a legal wrong or a legal injury is caused to a person or to a determinate class of persons by reason of violation of any constitutional or legal right or any burden is imposed in contravention of any constitutional or legal provision or without authority of law and such class of persons are unable to approach the Court for relief, any member of the public can maintain an application for an appropriate direction, order or writ in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it is unnecessary to deicide this question at this stage, since the present writ partition is disposed of an other grounds.