The Supreme Court on Monday left it to the discretion of the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court as master of roster to allocate an appropriate Bench to hear a suo motu revision proceedings against Tamil Nadu Revenue Minister K.K.S.S.R. Ramachandran in a corruption case.
An apex court Bench headed by Justice Hrishikesh Roy, however, orally expressed reservations about Justice Anand Venkatesh, acting as a Single Judge Bench of the Madras High Court, taking suo motu cognisance to revive the case. Justice Roy said the judge ought to have ideally placed the matter before the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court for passing an order numbering the suo motu case and assigning it to a Bench. “We deem it appropriate to say that the suo motu matter should be considered by the Chief Justice. He may either proceed to take up the matter himself or may assign it to a judge of the High Court, as he may consider appropriate,” the apex court recorded in its order.
The Bench noted that all proceedings should emanate from the office of the Chief Justice in his administrative capacity of the master of the roster of the particular High Court. “The learned judge could have ideally directed the Registry to obtain orders of the Chief Justice of the High Court to allot suo motu revision number. Instead, a direction was issued to the Registry to allot suo motu revision number for the case being handled by the Judge,” the apex court noted.
In November last year, the lawyers of Tamil Nadu Higher Education Minister K. Ponmudy and his wife were in for a surprise when Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud praised the initiative taken by Justice Venkatesh to initiate suo motu proceedings against their clients.
“Thank god for our judicial institution we have judges like Justice Anand Venkatesh,” Chief Justice Chandrachud had observed. addressed senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi, who were appearing for the Minister and his wife, P. Visalatchi.
Justice Venkatesh, on August 10, had taken suo motu cognisance of the transfer of the corruption trial against Mr. Ponmudy from the Villupuram District Judge to the Vellore District Judge on the basis of an order passed by the then Chief Justice of Madras High Court on the administrative side. Justice Venkatesh had observed that the transfer of a criminal trial on the basis of an administrative order, and not a judicial one, was “ex-facie illegal and non-est in the eye of law”. Mr. Ponmudy has questioned the exercise of suo motu powers by Justice Venkatesh to review an acquittal.
