CHENNAI: Alleging legal infirmities in the Madras High Court order, dated February 20, 2026, directing the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) to register an FIR forthwith on the alleged cash-for-jobs scam involving the TN Municipal Administration and Water Supply (MAWS) Department, minister for the department KN Nehru urged the court to suspend the order and give him protection from any such action by the DVAC.
However, the first bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan, before whom a contempt of court petition and the review petitions came up for hearing on Tuesday, adjourned the hearing to the fourth week of June.
Further, it noted that there was no specific direction in the February 20 order to register an FIR against the minister, when senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Nehru, pressed for suspending the order and not registering the FIR until the review plea is heard.
“There is no specific direction to register the FIR against the fifth respondent (Nehru). See the order, it only says the second respondent vigilance department is directed to register a case on the information shared by the ED and conduct detailed expeditious investigation,” the bench said.
Recording the undertaking given by senior counsel V Raghavachari, appearing for the contempt petitioner IS Inbadurai MP, that he would not pursue the case until the court’s summer vacation, the bench adjourned the hearing.
Rohatgi, assisted by advocate Aparajitha Vishwanath, submitted that his client was not given the opportunity of being heard before the court passed the orders and made accusations against him. “The order was accusing me (Nehru) of several things without granting an opportunity of hearing. The court has ordered the registration of an FIR against me saying that I am guilty of so many things. So, I am asking the court to suspend the order till the time I am heard,” he said.
He noted that the order was passed on a petition filed by a political opponent (Inbadurai). The counsel said Nehru was issued with a notice, may be wrongly, on February 4 afternoon after the court had already reserved the orders in the forenoon. The bench stated that the registry could not have sent the notice when the court actually did not order issuance of the notice.
Raghavachari said every one was watching the proceedings before the court issued orders but now the fifth respondent is saying he was not heard.
It may be recalled that the first bench of CJ Manindra Mohan Shrivastava (since retired) and Justice G Arul Murugan passed the February 20 order on the petition seeking a direction to the DVAC to register FIR on the recruitment of 2,538 posts in MAWS department based on the communication sent to the DGP by ED regarding the alleged scam. Later, he filed the contempt of court plea alleging willful disobedience of the order.
Meanwhile, TN government filed a review petition praying for the court to review the order. Later, Nehru moved another review petition seeking to set aside the order to register FIR.
Liquor limit: TN seeks clarity on HC order
The Madras High Court is likely to take up a petition, on Wednesday, filed by the state seeking a clarification on the court’s recent order stating a person can be permitted to possess 4.5 litres of liquor for personal use under the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Possession for Personal Consumption) Rules.
State public prosecutor Hasan Mohammed Jinnah mentioned the matter before Justice M Nirmal Kumar on Tuesday, and the latter agreed to take up the petition on Wednesday.
While ordering the quashing of a case pending at a judicial magistrate court in Cuddalore district against one Vallarasu regarding the possession of 1.68 litres of liquor transported from Puducherry, the judge noted that the TN Liquor Rules permits possession of 4.5 litres of liquor for permission but the petitioner had 1.68 litres in his possession.
