Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 14 to July 20, 2025

Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 239 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 245 NOMINAL INDEX Malar Selvi v. The Director DVAC, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 239 Dr.A.K.Boominathan v. The Director of Collegiate Education and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 240 Thirumalaisamy v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 241 Venkatesan v. The District Collector and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 242 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 243 Prakash Ramachandran v. The District Collector and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 244 R.K.M Powergen Private Limited v. The Assistant Director and others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 245 REPORT DVAC Cannot Ignore Corruption Complaints Over Absence Of Documents, Must Gather Evidence Itself: Madras High Court Case Title: Malar Selvi v. The Director DVAC Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 239 The Madras High Court recently observed that the Department of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption should not brush aside complaints merely because of the absence of documents. The court added that the DVAC was a specialised investigative agency and must gather evidence across all departments. Justice B Pugalendhi added that as per the Vigilance Manual, the department had the power to discreetly verify facts, access roads, and conduct discreet searches. The court added that the strength of the department was crucial for preventing corruption. Noting that the department, at present was understaffed, the court asked the Government of Tamil Nadu to take appropriate steps to strengthen the department and enhance the sanctioned strength and infrastructure within 6 months. Aided Colleges Can't Compel Students To Participate In Religious Or Communal Activities Not Approved By Education Dept: Madras High Court Case Title: Dr.A.K.Boominathan v. The Director of Collegiate Education and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 240 The Madras High Court has held that a aided college cannot compel its students to take part in any religious, communal or other activities which are not approved by the Department of Education. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice AD Maria Clete also observed that if it was found that an aided college was compelling students either directly or indirectly, the Director of Collegiate Education could initiate appropriate action to cancel the aid. The court added that aid should be granted only to colleges that follow the law and the Constitution. The court also made it clear that no posters or banners indicating communal name or a group's name should be affixed in the college premises and in case such posters are found, the police and the Department of Education could take all necessary action. Madras High Court Shocked Over SC Community Members Made To Wait Till Other Community Members Fetch Water From Common Tap Case Title: Thirumalaisamy v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Another Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 241 The Madras High Court recently expressed shock over members of the Scheduled Caste community being made to wait for their turn till members from other community fetch water from the common tap. Justice RN Manjula said that it was “surprising and pathetic” to note that even in this scientific age, some communities had to stand second in order to get their share of common resources. The court added that even though specific legislations had been brought in for protecting the vulnerable sections of the society, the situation still remained same at the grass root level. The court added that while it may not be easy to remove the caste and class mentality from the minds of the people, the people in power could not remain mute spectators. The court emphasized that what was needed what not some make-believe stunt but some practical solution and noiseless action. Thus, being aware of the realities and doing things that can be best done with the power vested was the need of the hour, the court added. Temple Entry Cannot Be Denied To Persons Based On Caste: Madras High Court Case Title: Venkatesan v. The District Collector and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 242 The Madras High Court has emphasized that no person can be denied temple entry due to their caste, and action should be taken against any such person discriminating against persons who prevent individuals from participating in temple function. Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that preventing people from entering temples and offering prayers on the basis of their caste was an affront to their dignity. The court added that such discrimination cannot be permitted in a country which was governed by the rule of law. The court also remarked that caste and community were human creations and the God was always considered neutral. The court also highlighted that as per Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Temple Entry Authorisation Act 1947, every Hindu, irrespective of his caste or sect, shall be entitled to enter a Hindu temple and offer worship. In...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 14 to July 20, 2025

Upasana Sajeev

Tags