MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on Thursday sought a report from the central and state governments on the steps taken by them to deport illegal immigrants who are staying in Tamil Nadu.
A vacation bench comprising justices M Dhandapani and R Sakthivel gave the direction on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by KK Ramesh of Madurai seeking a direction to the government to take action against foreign nationals, especially those from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Africa, who are illegally staying in India.
Citing media reports, petitioner claimed that nearly 46,000 foreign nationals are illegally staying in Tamil Nadu despite expiry of their visa. He alleged that such persons collude with political party leaders and involve in illegal activities like transporting drugs, weapons, etc. He also cited the recent terror attack in Pahalgam and sought the above direction. He further sought an interim direction to cancel the registration of political parties which support terrorists.
The judges orally observed that though the court issued a series of directions a few years ago to tackle the issue, the government has not taken any steps and remains a silent spectator. They issued notice to the Union Ministries of Home and External Affairs, Election Commission of India, State Home department and Director General of Police and directed them to file a report at the next hearing on June 9.
Notice issued to Sivaji Ganesan’s sons on appeal against lifting of bungalow’s attachment order
Chennai: The Madras HC on Thursday ordered notice to late actor Sivaji Ganesan’s sons Prabhu and Ramkumar, and others, on an appeal filed by a film financing company challenging a single judge’s order to recall the order for attachment of parts of late actor Sivaji Ganesan’s T Nagar bungalow in a money dispute case. A vacation bench of justices N Mala and G Arul Murugan directed the respondents, including the late actor’s sons and grandson Dusshyanth Ramkumar, to file counter-affidavit to the appeal moved by Dhanabakkiam Enterprises by June 3, 2025. However, the bench refused to stay the operation of the single judge’s order and adjourned the hearing to June 3.