The Madras High Court criticised State officials for remaining ex parte in a 2001 case involving government “Natham Poramboke” land, calling it a serious lapse affecting public interest. The Court directed strict guidelines, timelines, and disciplinary action to protect government property in future cases.
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court suggested that the Tamil Nadu government allow five persons named by the Court to offer symbolic prayers for 15 minutes near the Deepathoon atop Thiruparankundram hill. The Court clarified that the proposal is only a suggestion, not a direction, amid the Karthigai Deepam contempt proceedings.
The Supreme Court of India set aside the Madras High Court’s late-evening interim order staying Tamil Nadu laws on Vice-Chancellor appointments, citing denial of adequate hearing to the State.
The apex court remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration and asked it to decide the case expeditiously within six weeks.
The Tamil Nadu government will approach the Supreme Court, challenging the Madras High Court’s verdict permitting the lighting of Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram hill, citing the absence of tradition and public order concerns.
Amid the Thiruparankundram hill dispute and Tamil Nadu’s refusal to enforce a single-judge order allowing Karthigai Deepam near a dargah, former Madras High Court judge Justice S.S. Sundar criticised the ruling, questioning permission for a practice despite law-and-order warnings.
The Madras High Court expressed concern over the “scandalously high” fees paid to some government law officers and senior advocates in Tamil Nadu. Justice G.R. Swaminathan stressed that public money must be used responsibly and called for better governance in legal appointments and payments.
Former Madhya Pradesh High Court judge KK Trivedi stated that the Opposition’s move to impeach Madras High Court judge Justice G R Swaminathan is either politically motivated or intended to influence a favorable ruling. He warned that such actions undermine judicial independence and credibility.
The Supreme Court held that once a dependent of a deceased employee accepts compassionate appointment, the right stands exhausted, and the appointee cannot later demand transfer or appointment to a higher post in public employment under service law.
Tamil Nadu has moved the Supreme Court challenging the President’s decision to withhold assent to its 2021 anti-NEET Bill. The State says the refusal is unconstitutional and creates a federal deadlock.
