Chennai Feb 26 PTI The Madras High Court has lambasted the then secretary of the Selection Committee for medical admissions in 2020 who had committed grave irregularities in admitting candidates for PG courses and directed him to pay Rs 4 lakh each two meritorious candidates who were deprived of seats and ordered police probe on the entire issue The court gave the directions and made the observations while passing further interim orders on a batch of writ petitions from three meritorious candidates on Friday If this Court does not step in to take action in accordance with law the faith that has been reposed on this Court by the public would have a whirlwind downfall Therefore on a consideration of the entire materials placed before this Court in the form of enquiry reports and material documents it clearly transpires that Dr G Selvarajan the then Secretary Selection Committee Directorate of Medical Education has not only been instrumental in depriving the meritorious candidates of their rightful seats under the management quota in the private medical colleges which are under the scanner of the enquiry officer by not following the mandate of the Medical Council of India and the orders of the Honble Supreme Court but even on a holistic consideration of the case this Court is of the view that the nexus does not start or end with him Justice M Dhandapani said The tentacles of illegality are cast far and wide as the perpetrator of the crime could not be an isolated individual in the form of the then Secretary but the said officer would definitely had been aided by other persons in stage-managing the aforesaid act which has deprived the meritorious candidates of their right to seats of their choice under the management quota Therefore a deeper probe into the acts committed by the then Secretary as also the other persons whoever be it requires to be looked into without which a complete probe cannot be said to have been made the judge said The amount of Rs 8 lakh shall be initially paid by the government within four weeks to the two petitioners and later recovered from the retirement benefits of Selvarajan the judge added PTI CORR SA SA

Chennai Jan 27 PTI A division bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday confirmed the orders of a single judge on the subject of admission in PG courses for inservice doctors in Tamil Nadu The single judge had upheld the orders passed in October last year by the Tamil Nadu government which among others enabled the inservice doctors working in government hospitals in rural and remote areas to seek admission in PG courses under their exclusive inservice quota as well as the open quota The bench of Justices Paresh Upadiyay and SKS Kurup confirmed the order dated January 19 of Justice M Dhandapani while dismissing an appeal from Dr Parkaviyan today Originally assailing Sl No 29 c of the impugned prospectus issued for filling up the seats in the post-graduate degree courses in medicine under the 50 per cent State quota in and by which in-service candidates who had put in service in difficult terrains in the State were permitted to carry on their weightage marks not only for the reserved seats but also to compete for the seats under the open category by carrying with them the weightage marks the writ petitions were filed And the single judge on January 19 had held that in the backdrop of the legal position coupled with the reasonable and intelligible differentia in classifying the two groups of persons aspiring for PG admission in the State-wise quota the court was of the considered view that not only the State was empowered to create channels of selection by prescribing quotas for open category and in-service candidates but also it was within its powers to lay down norms with regard to the basis in which the merit list was to be prepared for determining the inter se merit of the candidates competing in the two different categories The State could not be precluded from exercising the powers conferred on it by the Constitution more especially Entry 25 List III of the Constitution would be denuding the State of its power which has been given to it by the Constitution and as approved by the Supreme Court the judge had held Hence this court is of the considered view that the norms prescribed under Sl No 29 c of the prospectus and the consequential GOs issued in October 2021 for selection of candidates to the PG medical degree courses under the State-wise quota does not suffer the vice of any illegality irrationality arbitrariness or perversity and the same is founded on well guided principles and application of law and therefore the said norm does not require any interference at the hands of this court the judge had said on January 19 Aggrieved the petitioners preferred the present appeals The bench confirmed the orders of the single judge after listening to the arguments of Suhirith Parthasarathy for the appellant Additional Advocate-General J Ravindran for the State and senior advocate P Wilson for the inservice doctors PTI COR SA ROH ROH

Chennai Dec 19 PTI Author-filmmaker Leena Manimekalai on Sunday said she was compelled to put it out publicly that she feels unsafe because of continued harassment by Tamil film director Susi Ganesan whom she has accused of sexual misconduct in the pastManimekalai had accused Ganesan of sexual harassment during the MeToo movement in 2018Actor Amala Paul who had worked with Ganesan in his 2017 crime thriller Thiruttu Payale 2 had supported Manimekalai and also levelled accusations against the filmmaker for subjecting her to double-meaning talks misrepresented offers and unchivalrous bodily contacts the same yearManimekalai shared a statement on Twitter writing how Ganesan had tried to silence every voice that came out in her support including actor SiddharthThe filmmaker wrote that Ganesan has been targeting her first through a defamation case and later with an attempt to impound her passportMy sexual harasser Susi Ganesan first threatened actor Siddharth for supporting my metoo tweet then both him and his wife threatened actor Amala Paul when she tweeted about his predatory behaviour Then he filed a defamation case And followed it up with the gross misuse of criminal justice system to impound my passportThen he wrote to my Canadian University Administration and Professors to cancel my student visa status Now he harasses journalists who cover the news and news editors who retweet my tweets sic Manimekalai said in her statementThe author who has five published poetry anthologies under her name said her family is concerned for her safety fearing that Ganesan might harm her physicallyMy mother frantically calls me every hour being scared that he can harm me physically as all his tools are running out I am feeling very unsafe and If something untoward happens to me I declare here in open that it will be his doingsic she further said in the statementGanesan had lodged a complaint against Manimekalai alleging that her social media posts against him during the MeToo movement had tarnished his image in the eyes of the general public and thereby she had committed an offence of defamation under IPC section 500On December 3 however the Madras High Court set aside the order of the Regional Passport Authority impounding Manimekalais passport and instructed that the travel documents be returned to her within a weekJustice M Dhandapani who quashed the September 9 order this year directed Manimekalai to appear before a lower court where a defamation case was pending against her and co-operate to complete the trial PTI JUR RDS RDS RDS

Chennai Sep 28 PTI The Madras High Court on Tuesday set aside a defamation case pending against Telangana Governor Dr Tamilisai Soundararajan before a lower court in Kancheepuram in Tamil Nadu Though the complaint had been filed under Section 199 read with 200 CrPC for an offence under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code punishment for defamation the Judicial Magistrate Court had issued summons under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act This clearly shows that the trial court has not adverted to the materials placed before it while taking cognizance of the case and the said act of the trial court in issuing a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for an offence alleged to have been committed under Section 500 IPC exhibits clear non-application of mind on its part and even on the very short ground the cognizance taken by the trial court transforming itself into CC No2122017 deserves to be quashed Justice M Dhandapani said The judge was allowing a criminal original petition from Soundararajan seeking to quash the case As the president of the state unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party earlier Soundararajan gave an interview to the electronic and print media in 2017 where she termed the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi VCK to which the complainant Dhadi Karthikeyan belonged to as a party which was conducting Kangaroo courts and grabbing lands from the public and uttered derogatory remarks against the party and its head TholThirumavalavan On the said averments a private complaint was filed by Karthikeyan invoking Section 199 read with 200 of the CrPC before the Judicial Magistrate in Kancheepuram which was entertained and taken on file by issuing summons to the petitioner Aggrieved Soundararajan filed the present petition to quash the case The judge pointed that sub-section 6 of Section 199 CrPC would come into play only when the statement alleged to have been made affected the right of the person against whom the offence was reportedly committed to make a complaint in respect of that offence before a Magistrate having jurisdiction or the power of such Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence upon such complaint However in the case on hand as contended by the petitioner the private complaint has been filed by Karthikeyan as a member of the political party against the statements alleged to have been made against the VCK and its leader However neither the person nor the party which was alleged to have been affected by the said statements had given any authorisation to him to file the complaint Karthikeyan on his own accord for reasons best known to him had thought it fit to file the private complaint Him being not affected by the alleged statement his action of invoking the offence us 500 IPC does not merit acceptance the court said Therefore the private complaint alleging defamation has no legs to stand on and the cognizance taken on the said complaint deserves to be quashed the judge said and accordingly set it aside PTI COR SA APR APR