Councillor in soup for false assets declaration during 2011 civic polls
CHENNAI: The first bench of the Madras High Court has directed the TN State Election Commission (SEC) to take action against Injambakkam councillor Annamalai for filing false declaration of assets during the 2011 civic polls.
The bench of Chief Justice SK Kaul and Justice M Sundar gave the direction when the PIL filed by Pon Thangavelu, a voter in ward No.196 came up on Tuesday.
The judges noted that in the affidavit for his nomination to the local body election, the councillor had stated that he owned no property at all. He had stated ‘nil’ in the respective column, even though he owned many properties in his name as well as his family members.
In the counter affidavit filed before the court, he had stated that the same is a human error. “It is a clear case of mis-declaration of assets. The authorities concerned should examine the consequences and initiate necessary action against him,” the bench said.
Originally, Thangavelu had filed a writ petition alleging that councillor Annamalai had amassed wealth and made constructions in utter violation of the rules. When it came up before Justice N Kirubakaran, he directed the SEC to file the details of the declarations made by the councillor before the court.
It became evident that contrary to the declaration made by Annamalai that he did not have any asset, he was in possession of about 12 properties in his and his family members’ names. Observing that the declaration was a farce and that there was no mechanism to verify the truth, the Judge had referred the matter to the Chief Justice as public interest was involved.
When the petition came up, the bench also directed the Director General of Income Tax (Investigation), TN and Puducherry, to check whether the councillor has ‘forgotten’ to declare his assets only in the nomination papers or the same theory was extended even to his tax returns!
Meanwhile, as per the earlier direction, the Corporation of Chennai filed a counter-affidavit, which stated that of the 12 properties, the councillor had encroached upon government poromboke land in respect of five properties. Action had been initiated by issuing notice under Sections 56 (1) and 57 of the TN Town and Country Planning Act.
In its counter-affidavit, the CMDA stated that it would cooperate with the Corporation for necessary action. Posting the matter to March 2, the bench held that wherever unauthorised constructions have to be removed or cleared, the police authorities should render assistance.