A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Madras High Court challenging the Tamil Nadu government’s decision to appoint G. Venkatraman as the in-charge Director General of Police, despite several other senior officers being eligible for regular appointment to the post.

The petition, filed by R. Varadaraj, 69, a retired police inspector-turned-advocate and President of Nethaji Makkal Katchi, is scheduled to be heard by a division bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan on Monday.

Varadaraj, who served for 25 years in the Fingerprint Bureau before opting for voluntary retirement in 2005, argued that the government had flouted binding directives of the Supreme Court issued in the landmark Prakash Singh case of 2006. The apex court had mandated that states must forward the names of all eligible DGP-rank officers to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), which would then prepare a panel of three meritorious officers.

The state government was required to appoint one from the panel, ensuring a fixed tenure of two years. According to the petitioner, Tamil Nadu should have sent the list to the UPSC by May 2025, three months before the retirement of former DGP Shankar Jiwal on 31 August. However, the list was not forwarded on time, resulting in what he termed an “ad-hoc and untenable” appointment. Significantly, the petitioner claimed that Venkatraman, who was serving as DGP, Administration, was himself responsible for preparing and forwarding the list to the Home Secretary and the Chief Secretary, but ended up being chosen for the top post instead.

This, he alleged, reeked of political expediency. The PIL also expressed concern that the ad-hoc appointment, coming ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections, could compromise the impartiality of the police force. The petitioner urged the court to quash the Home Secretary’s notification dated 31 August, appointing Venkatraman and to direct the government to initiate the proper UPSC-led process for appointing a regular DGP. Until then, Varadaraj requested that one among the three senior-most officers in the DGP cadre be allowed to hold charge, and sought an interim order restraining Venkatraman from occupying the post pending the outcome of the case.

-IANS

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post PIL In Madras High Court Challenges Appointment Of Tamil Nadu’s In-Charge DGP G. Venkatraman appeared first on The Commune.

Tamil Nadu Forest Minister K. Ponmudy has found himself embroiled in controversy after making derogatory remarks about Shaivism and Vaishnavism, along with indecent and offensive comments about women during a public event organized by the Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam. In response, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Madras High Court, seeking his removal from the state cabinet. The PIL, submitted by advocate B Jagannath, claims that Ponmudy’s statements are a violation of the responsibilities entrusted to a public servant under the Constitution and calls for his immediate dismissal from ministerial duties.

The controversy erupted after Ponmudy, while speaking at an event organized by the Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam, recounted a vulgar anecdote that linked sacred Hindu religious symbols to sexual positions. The minister referenced a crude joke historically shared in Dravidian movement circles, which equated the forehead markings of Shaivites and Vaishnavites to different sexual acts. The remarks, which quickly went viral, drew widespread condemnation from various political and religious groups.

He said, “A man goes to the home of a sex worker. She asked him if he was a Shaivaite or a Vaishnavite. He did not understand. If she had asked for ₹5 or ₹10, it would have been okay. He pondered why she asked if he was a Shaivaite or Vaishnavite coming to a sex worker’s home. When he asked, he did not understand her question. She said if you are a Shaivaite, you wear holy ash this way, and if you are Vaishnavaite, you wear it this way. He did not understand. He asked her what she meant. She said if you are Shaivaite, it means intercourse in a lying position, and if it is Vaishnavaite, intercourse in a standing position.” This went viral and received criticism from all quarters.

This is DMK’s standard of political discourse in Tamil Nadu. Thiru Ponmudi was once the Higher Education Minister of Tamil Nadu & now Minister for Forests and Khadi, and the youth of Tamil Nadu are expected to tolerate this filth? Not just this Minister, the entire DMK ecosystem… pic.twitter.com/ENMq47hiPf

— K.Annamalai (@annamalai_k) April 11, 2025

B Jagannath, in his PIL, criticized the lack of police response despite multiple complaints being filed, including one by BJP leaders with the Chennai Police Commissioner. He emphasized that Ponmudy, as an elected official, is constitutionally bound to respect and protect the sentiments of all citizens, regardless of religious affiliation.

Facing intense backlash, Ponmudy issued a public apology on 12 April 2025, acknowledging the inappropriateness of his comments. “I sincerely apologize for the words I used. It was a lapse in judgment. I regret having caused offense and embarrassment to many,” he said in a statement, expressing remorse for the hurt his remarks caused.

In response to the uproar, the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) removed Ponmudy from his position as the party’s Deputy General Secretary. However, he continues to serve as the Forest Minister, a decision that has drawn criticism from opposition parties and civil society alike.

DMK MP Kanimozhi, sister of Chief Minister and party leader M.K. Stalin, condemned Ponmudy’s comments, labeling them “unacceptable.” AIADMK leader Sellur Raju also criticized the minister, accusing him of frequently making disparaging remarks about women and marginalized communities.

BJP spokesperson C.R. Kesavan demanded Ponmudy’s immediate dismissal from the cabinet, stating that his statements have stripped him of any moral right to hold public office.

The PIL is expected to be heard by the Madras High Court on 24 April 2025, as pressure mounts on the state government to take firmer action.

(With inputs from Federal News)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post PIL Filed In Madras HC Seeking DMK Minister K Ponmudy’s Removal Over Derogatory Remarks On Hinduism And Women appeared first on The Commune.

On 3 March 2025, the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court directed all parties involved in the case related to Thiruparankundram Hill to submit their written responses by 24 March 2025.

A public interest litigation was filed by Kannan and others from Madurai, seeking a ban on the sacrifice of goats and roosters at the sacred Thiruparankundram Hilltop Dargah in Madurai. The Thiruparankundram temple, dating back to the Pandya period, is a significant landmark, housing the Umayandar Cave Temple and 11 other sacred ponds. According to existing regulations, animal sacrifices are prohibited within the temple grounds.

Recent reports suggested that the Muslim fundamentalists attempted to carry goats and roosters to perform sacrifices at the Sikkandar Dargah atop Thiruparankundram Hill in January 2025. The petitions argued that such sacrifices would hurt the sentiments of devotees visiting the Thiruparankundram Subramania Swamy Temple. The petitioners also sought a ban on the slaughtering, cooking, and serving of animal meat on the hill.

In addition, the petitioners requested that Thiruparankundram Hill be placed under the jurisdiction of the Central Government’s Archaeological Survey of India. They also raised concerns about the hill being referred to as Sikandar Hill and sought official recognition of the hill as Jain Hills. Other petitions included calls for better basic facilities on the hill, preventing police interference with the renovation of the Sikandar Dargah, and halting Muslims from offering prayers in the Nellithope area.

The case was heard by Justices Nisha Banu and Srimathi. The lawyer representing the Archaeological Department noted that while permission had been requested from the Collector to survey the Thiruparankundram Hill, it had not yet been granted. The judges adjourned the hearing until 24 March 2025, directing all parties to submit their responses. They also indicated that a decision on the use of drones for measuring the area would be made at that time.

Backdrop

In January 2025, the sacred Hindu site of Thirupparankundram Hills witnessed escalating tensions, sparked by controversial actions by a Muslim politician that fueled divisive rhetoric. Navas Kani, a member of the Indian Union Muslim League and MP from Ramanathapuram, who also served as the chairman of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, stirred further discord by declaring that the dargah atop the hill was Waqf property. He also posted on social media, claiming that Muslims had consumed cooked non-vegetarian food at the foothills, which outraged Hindus and devotees. This statement sent shockwaves through the region, further escalating existing tensions.

This development is part of a series of incidents that have strained relations between Hindus and Muslims, who had previously lived in harmony. Some Islamists groups have been attempting to assert their rights to conduct animal sacrifices at the hilltop, furthering their claims that the entire Thirupparankundram Hills should be recognized as Sikkandar Hills.

The situation escalated on 27 December 2024, when Madurai police intervened to detain a group of Muslims family attempting to bring goats and roosters to the hilltop dargah for ritual sacrifice. Syed Abu Dahir, a 53-year-old from Malaiyadipatti in Rajapalayam, arrived with his family and animals for the ceremony but was stopped by authorities at the base of the hill. Police informed them that bringing livestock up the hill was prohibited, which led to a protest by over 20 local Muslims at the foot of the hill in solidarity with the family.

The following week, on 5 January 2025, another large group of Muslim protesters gathered at Thirupparankundram Hills, demanding permission to offer prayers at the mosque located at the top. When the police denied their request, tensions escalated, leading to a brief scuffle and the detention of the protesters.

On 17 January 2025, during the Santhanakoodu Festival at a nearby dargah, social media posts began circulating about an upcoming “Equality Feast” (Samabanthi Bhojan) on 18 January at the hilltop dargah, where goats and roosters were allegedly to be sacrificed. Fearing communal unrest, police set up barricades and conducted searches to prevent the transportation of livestock to the hill. When the dargah Jamath was informed that animal sacrifices were not allowed, protests broke out. Members of the Jamath, along with other Muslim protesters, clashed with the police, causing further disruptions.

The situation was exacerbated by the involvement of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), an ally of AIADMK and a group linked to the banned terror outfit PFI. These elements are believed to be behind the attempts to conduct animal sacrifices at the sacred Thirupparankundram Hill.

Furthering tensions, on 21 January 2025, DMK Manapparai MLA Abdul Samad was accused of conducting an illegal survey around the temple with intentions to gain control of the hill. On the same day, IUML member and Ramanathapuram MP Navas Kani was seen giving an interview near the Thirupparankundram Hills. When asked whether the dargah at the hilltop was under the Waqf Board, Kani confirmed, “Yes, it is under the control of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board,” further heightening tensions in the area.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally

The post Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Directs Parties To Submit Written Responses On Thiruparankundram Hills Issue appeared first on The Commune.

The Hon’ble First Division Bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Chief Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, heard W.P. No. 26189 of 2021 and Contempt Petition No. 5 of 2022, regarding the reconstruction and renovation of the Arulmighu Vijay Varadaraja Perumal Temple in Baburayanpettai, Chengalpet District. Advocate B. Jagannath appeared as a petitioner and party-in-person, raising concerns over the heritage and sanctity of the temple.

During the morning session, when the matter was taken up, Additional Advocate General (AAG) J. Ravindran submitted a status report on behalf of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department. However, the Bench noted that the report was not in the form of a sworn affidavit. The AAG apologized for the oversight and sought permission to withdraw the status report, assuring the court that a sworn affidavit by the Commissioner of HR&CE would be filed.

Petitioner B. Jagannath objected to the use of the word “demolition” in the tender notification issued for the temple works, arguing that such language could jeopardize the temple’s heritage value. The court expressed concern over the phrasing and directed the HR&CE Commissioner to appear in person at 2:15 PM to clarify the department’s stance. The Bench also sought clarification on whether experts in Agamas (traditional temple scriptures) and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) had been consulted, particularly given that the sanctum sanctorum (Garba Griha) of the temple was part of the reconstruction. The Bench cited the example of the Brihadeeswarar Temple in Thanjavur as a model for preserving heritage structures.

In the afternoon session, the HR&CE Commissioner, P.N. Sridhar, appeared in person along with the Executive Officer of the temple. The court questioned the Commissioner about the inclusion of the term “demolition” in the tender documents. In response, the AAG, with assistance from the Commissioner, submitted a sworn affidavit affirming that the tender process and related works would preserve the temple’s sanctity and heritage.

The affidavit detailed the timelines for the project, stating that the estimates had been approved as of 28 December 2024. A tender notice was subsequently issued on 3 January 2025. The work schedule outlined included:

• Approval of estimates: 1 month
• Tendering process and signing of agreements: 3 months
• Completion of works: 2.5 years
• Kumbhabishekam (consecration ceremony): 2 months after renovation

The petitioner pointed out that the tender mentioned “dismantling and reconstruction” of the sanctum sanctorum, which he argued would affect the temple’s heritage value. He emphasized the need for permissions and approvals from the Tamil Nadu Heritage Committee, formed in 2024, and the ASI.

The AAG assured the court that the term “demolition” referred only to necessary dismantling for renovation purposes and that the reconstruction would be guided by experts, including retired ASI personnel, Agama scholars, traditional architects, and sculptors. The Bench recorded these assurances and noted that the works would aim to preserve the sanctity and heritage of the temple.

The petitions have been adjourned to 27 February 2025, for further compliance and updates on the tender process.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Madras High Court Demands Clarity On Heritage Preservation By HR&CE Dept In Baburayanpettai Temple Renovation appeared first on The Commune.

On 20 November 2024, the Madras High Court issued a stern warning that if the orders regarding the renovation of the Vijaya Varadaraja Perumal Temple are not properly executed, the Commissioner of the HR&CE Department may face removal.

The warning came from the first bench, led by Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, in response to a contempt of court petition filed by Advocate B. Jagannath. The petition sought to penalize the officer for willfully disregarding a 2020 court order that directed authorities to take necessary actions to renovate the temple located in Baburayanpet, Chengalpattu district.

The petitioner presented evidence, including photographs showing the temple’s deteriorating condition, and argued that the HR&CE Department had failed to take adequate steps to preserve the heritage site. The court expressed disappointment over the department’s lack of initiative in safeguarding the Vijaya Varadaraja Perumal Temple, an important national heritage monument.

The temple, which is under the control of the HR&CE Department, was the subject of a public interest litigation filed by Advocate B. Jaganath in the High Court. The litigation requested that the ritual work and Kumbabhishekam (consecration ceremony) be carried out in accordance with Vadakalai Vaishnava traditions. The court ordered the HR&CE Department to complete the ceremony within 12 weeks of the 2020 ruling.

However, despite the court’s instructions, no progress had been made, leading Advocate Jagannath to file a contempt case. During the hearing, Jagannath provided photographs showing the temple in a dilapidated state, with overgrown plants and thorns surrounding the premises. He stated that the Kumbabhishekam had not yet taken place despite the court’s order.

The court responded by calling for the HR&CE Commissioner to appear for the afternoon session. During the hearing, Charity Commissioner PN Sreedhar joined via video conference, and the department’s legal representatives, including Additional Advocate General J. Ravindran, assured that an inspection would be conducted, and renovation work would commence within a week.

The bench expressed frustration that the contempt case had been pending for two years and emphasized that the HR&CE Department had shown indifference to the matter, despite the public welfare nature of the case. The court highlighted that the temple, as a national heritage symbol, should be preserved and maintained with the same care as other historic monuments like Stonehenge in Britain or Mount Abu in Rajasthan.

In its ruling, the court ordered the immediate removal of the overgrowth and directed that a status report be submitted by 29 November. The court also warned that failure to comply with the orders could result in the removal of the HR&CE Commissioner and other disciplinary actions. The HR&CE Commissioner was instructed to report on the progress of the renovation work and outline the next steps for the temple’s restoration.

(With Inputs From Dinamalar)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Madras HC Warns HR&CE Commissioner: Renovate Vijaya Varadaraja Perumal Temple Or Face Removal appeared first on The Commune.

The Madras High Court has formed a committee to investigate reported encroachments on the Tiruvannamalai Girivalam path and instructed it to provide a comprehensive report.

Advocate Elephant Rajendran filed a petition to address encroachments on the sacred Arunachaleswarar hills in Tiruvannamalai town. The Court criticized the Forest and Revenue Departments of the Tamil Nadu government for permitting these encroachments, noting that “The very Mountain is Lord Siva.“

#NewsUpdate | "திருவண்ணாமலையே சிவன் தான்"#NewsTamil24x7 | #Tiruvannamalai | #Shivantemple | #LORDSHIVA | #publicwashroom | #Septictanks | #MadrasHighCourt pic.twitter.com/niPbcCsbsF

— News Tamil 24×7 (@NewsTamilTV24x7) July 17, 2024

This marks Advocate Elephant Rajendran’s second Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the temple town of Tiruvannamalai; the first addressed the disappearance and encroachment of 32 ponds in the area.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice R Mahadevan and Mohammad Shaffiq heard the PIL and appointed a committee chaired by the Tiruvannamalai district collector. This committee, which includes representatives from the district revenue, forest departments, and corporation commissioner, aims to investigate encroachments along the slopes of the 718-acre sacred Tiruvannamalai hills Girivalam path.

The petitioner highlighted illegal constructions on the hill’s slopes, obstructing the traditional flow of rainwater through several streams that feed tanks in Tiruvannamalai. Specific concerns included houses and infrastructure encroaching up to 400 feet along the hill’s slopes, including lavatories, bathrooms, and septic tanks.

In response to the seriousness of the allegations and the hill’s sanctity, the bench tasked the committee with submitting a report within 15 days after visiting the site. The Court scheduled the next hearing for 30 July 2024, expecting the committee’s findings by then.

(With Inputs From DT Next)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “The Very Mountain Is Lord Shiva,” Says Madras High Court, Initiates Probe Into Tiruvannamalai Hill Girivalam Path Encroachments appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court has strongly criticized the Tamil Nadu police for the incident involving intoxicated youths under the influence of ganja assaulting the public while riding their two-wheelers home after work in Madurai. The court has demanded answers regarding the number of cases registered for the sale and smuggling of ganja, the status of final reports filed in courts, and the submission of seized cannabis to court. These inquiries come as part of a wider investigation into the incident.

The court’s scrutiny stems from a Public interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by Thirumurugan from Ramanathapuram, following an incident on 22 April 2024 where seven individuals, intoxicated in the Othakadai area of Madurai, attacked Khan Mohammad as he passed by, resulting in serious injuries. The incident, captured on video and circulated on social media, led to the subsequent police case. Allegations surfaced suggesting collusion between the police and ganja sellers in the area, dissuading the public from filing complaints.

The access to drugs in TN under the DMK Govt is becoming easier like never before as peddlers are given plum posts in DMK, making law enforcement a joke.

This incident in Madurai where an innocent biker gets attacked is 4th such incident in TN in the last few days reported as… pic.twitter.com/LTR8RSxDj4

— K.Annamalai (@annamalai_k) April 23, 2024

As a result, the petitioner advocated for the establishment of outposts in key areas like Neelamega Nagar and Ayyappan Nagar, urging the police to crack down on individuals commuting under the influence of alcohol and ganja, even proposing the creation of a specialized unit within the police force to tackle narcotics trafficking and related criminal activities.

During the court proceedings, it was asserted by the government that those involved in the Othakadai area riots had consumed alcohol but not ganja. Additionally, it was stated that over the past three years, 2,486 individuals from foreign states have been arrested for involvement in ganja sales, with ongoing actions being taken in this regard.

However, the court raised concerns about the possibility of ganja trafficking thriving without the involvement of both judiciary and law enforcement officials. They questioned the effectiveness of efforts to combat ganja sales and smuggling under such circumstances. Consequently, they directed pertinent authorities, including the Tamil Nadu Home Secretary, Tamil Nadu Police DGP, and Director of Narcotics Control Division, to provide a comprehensive response to their inquiries and adjourned the hearing until 15 May 2024.

(With Inputs From Hindu Tamil)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “Ganja Trade Not Possible Without Connivance Of Police”: Madurai High Court Demands Accountability From TN Govt appeared first on The Commune.