Chennai, August 27: The Tamil Nadu Government today informed the Madras High Court that the AIADMK's petition seeking appointment of a high-level committee to monitor the law and order situation in Southern Districts was not in public interest and was aimed at serving its political needs.
This was stated in the counter affidavit filed by Chief Secretary L K Tripathi on behalf of the State Government on the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by AIADMK represented by its Fisheries Wing Secretary and MLA D Jayakumar.
Originally, this PIL was filed before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. But on a representation from the petitioner, it was tranfered to the principal bench here. The petitioner alleged that M K Azhagiri, son of Chief Minister M Karunanidhi, controlled the entire administration in the southern districts.
A Division Bench comprising Justice S J Mukhopadhaya and Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar, before whom the counter was filed, posted to September 5 further hearing of the case on the request of the petitioner.
The Chief Secretary sought dismissal of the PIL in limine as not maintainable.
He said the AIADMK, a political party, had abused the due process of law by seeking to ventilate political grievances in the form of PIL and this practice deserved to be deprecated by this court with exemplary cost.
Tripathi said the averments made in the PIL to the effect that a "minority" government was ruling the state was denied and was highly objectionable as there was no constitutional concept of a minority government. The petitioner should prove its majority in assembly to unseat an elected government. The highly scandalous allegations made against the Chief Minister was per se defamatory and brought down the dignity of democratic process and was calculated to scandalise the state. It was unfortunate of a major political party to resort to this kind of character assassination in the guise of a PIL.
The allegation that Azhagiri had emerged as one such extra constitutional authority was denied. The further allegation that his associates was involved in anti-social activities was also denied.
He denied the allegation that Azhagiri controlled the entire administration of southern districts.
He said the allegations of any alarming law and order break down in the Southern districts itself was a false premise and the remedy suggested by the petitioner was an extra constitutional prayer which cannot be countenanced.
The prayer for appointing an authority for receiving and forwarding complaints filed in various police stations was legally and constitutionally preposterous. The petitioner was suggesting the creation of a parallel extra constitutional force to do government functions, which was unprecedented, he added. (Agencies)