Read Time: 04 minutes
Last year, the Supreme Court had held that High Court should decide whether the probe by an independent agency is required or not and had directed the High court to consider the report of DVAC
Supreme Court today adjourned the hearing in a plea filed against a Madras High Court order refusing to initiate a fresh probe against former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and leader of AIADMK, Edapaddi Palanisamy in the Highway Tender scam.
A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi said that it would hear the matter on a non-miscellaneous day.
Court also refused to issue notice on the plea filed by Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), after Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for the Tamil Nadu DVAC requested the bench to do so.
Furthermore, Senior Advocate C Aryama Sundaram, appearing for Palanisamy, objected to issuance of notice, saying he wished to file additional submissions.
The matter will now be heard on October 17, 2023.
Last year, a Supreme Court bench headed by then Chief Justice of India Justice NV Ramana had set aside the order of Madras High Court directing a CBI investigation into tender irregularities in a department headed by Palanisamy.
The Madras High Court, in October 2018, had ordered a CBI investigation directing it to be completed within three months. R.S.Bharathi, a DMK MP, had filed a plea in the High Court alleging that Palaniswami misused his official position to allocate various road construction projects to companies owned by his relatives and others.
The plea by Bharathi further also sought the High Court’s direction to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) to register a case against Palaniswami. The Madras High Court rejected a preliminary report submitted by the DVAC, which gave a clean chit to Palaniswami.
Later in October 2018, the apex court stayed the Madras High Court order directing a CBI probe. On July 25, 2022, the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government had mentioned the plea before a bench headed by the Chief Justice of India and sought a hearing in the matter.
Court had then also held that the observations made in the order of the High Court will not come in the way of fresh consideration in the matter.
Case Title: The Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption vs. Edappadi Palaniswamy and Anr.
Please Login or Register
