Madras High Court Drops TVK Leaders Vijay and ‘Bussy’ Anand from Writ Petition Challenging Appointment of Law Officers
The Madras High Court has directed that the names of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president Vijay and the party’s General Secretary N. “Bussy” Anand be deleted from a writ petition challenging the appointment of government law officers in Villupuram district. Justice Mohammed Shaffiq observed that there was no material to justify impleading the two political leaders and remarked that they appeared to have been added to the proceedings merely to attract publicity.
The writ petition had been filed by a lawyer who also serves as the Joint Secretary of the TVK Advocates’ Wing in Villupuram district. The petitioner alleged irregularities and corruption in the appointment of Government Advocates and Law Officers, contending that deserving candidates had been overlooked in the selection process. Besides seeking a direction for a transparent appointment process, the petition had also named Vijay, Bussy Anand and certain local party functionaries as respondents.
During the hearing, Advocate General Vijay Narayan informed the Court that the appointments presently made were only temporary, for a period of six months, and that the State Government was already processing applications received pursuant to the notification issued for the appointment of Law Officers in subordinate courts. He assured the Court that the petitioner’s candidature would also be considered, provided her application satisfied the prescribed eligibility requirements.
Accepting the State’s submissions, Justice Mohammed Shaffiq held that the grievance raised in the petition had substantially been addressed. The Court also took note of the petitioner’s counsel agreeing not to press the case against Vijay and Bussy Anand. Consequently, the Registry was directed to delete their names from the array of parties, with the Court observing that there was no material indicating any personal involvement of the two leaders in the appointments under challenge.
The Court further remarked that advocates affiliated with different political parties, including the DMK and the AIADMK, had also been appointed as Government Law Officers. This, the Court observed, indicated that the appointments could not be viewed solely through the prism of political affiliation or bias. The Bench declined to accept the allegation that the selection process had been manipulated exclusively to favour members of a particular political party.
In view of the Advocate General’s assurance regarding the ongoing regular selection process and consideration of eligible applicants, the High Court closed the writ petition. The order underscores the principle that political leaders should not be impleaded in judicial proceedings without specific allegations supported by material evidence and cautions against unnecessarily involving public figures in litigation merely to generate headlines.
