The Madras High Court granted permission to the Tamil Nadu government to withdraw its appeals in a case related to the construction of a new Secretariat building
Chennai: The Madras High Court dismissed the Tamil Nadu government’s appeals against a judge’s order. The order cancelled a government order issued by the previous AIADMK administration regarding alleged irregularities in constructing a new Secretariat building.
The government order (GO) instructed transferring the files and records of the Justice Regupathy Commission of Inquiry to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC). The commission was set up to investigate alleged irregularities in building the new secretariat complex during the DMK regime from 2006 to 2011.
In response to the State Government’s request to withdraw the appeals, a division bench consisting of Justices R Suresh Kumar and K Kumaresh Babu dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The bench stated that the former AIADMK MP J Jayavardhan’s opposition to the state’s request to withdraw the appeals, based on previous judgments, couldn’t be upheld. The bench clarified that the referenced judgments were from criminal trial cases and were not relevant to this situation.
In this case, as highlighted by the Advocate General, it hadn’t progressed to that stage. The Single Judge, through an interim order, merely allowed the state to make a decision after examining the available evidence. Despite an initial decision to instruct the DVAC to conduct a thorough investigation. This decision was reversed in the challenged judgments.
The State filed these Intra Court Appeals, but now wants to withdraw them. As established in the case of Anurag Mittal vs Shaily Mishra Mittal. The bench noted,
“That anyone starting legal proceedings can always choose to withdraw or give up their claim“
In such a situation, the Court cannot compel a party to proceed with the case, especially when the party wants to drop their claim without preserving any rights.
Also Read: Madras High Court Orders In-Jail Trial Amid Threats: A Deep Dive into the Muthukumar Case
The Bench Stated,
“We are aware that the Government Order and the directive for a detailed inquiry, which they now aim to retract, do not negate the impleading petitioner’s right to seek legal recourse if they choose to, as their complaint has also been dismissed by the DVAC, as indicated in the report,”
The bench stated that although it recognized the impleading petitioner’s right to participate in these Intra Court Appeals, given the withdrawal of these appeals, proceeding with the impleading petitions would be pointless. Therefore, the applications for impleading were dismissed as unnecessary, the bench concluded.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE