Authorities failing to act on corruption defeats Act's lofty goals: Madras HC

CHENNAI: The objectives of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, 1988 will fail if those on whom the responsibility lies don't act, said the Madras High Court and directed the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj department to look into the corruption charges made against a panchayat president.

Justice N Seshasayee held that the Director of the Rural Development Department failed to consider the corruption complaint against the panchayat president under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, 1988, and directed the Secretary of the department to sensitise the authority on the scope and need to comply with the provisions.

The judge restrained himself from ordering an immediate investigation against the panchayat president, as this needs to be sanctioned by the competent authority. He held that the Court is aware that authorities have not been adequately sensitised about the seriousness and significance of the PC act.

The petitioner, M Ramachandran, sent a representation to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption alleging graft charges against the panchayat president of Itchiputhur village, Ranipet.

The complaint was transferred to the Director of the Rural Development department for sanction to investigate the allegation. As the petition had been pending before the authority for more than seven months without any action, the petitioner moved the court.

The judge held that no authority under a statutory obligation to perform his duty shall hold the investigation process to ransom. The court expects every authority enjoying the duty to approve to act swiftly, he said.

The court also directed the Director of the Rural Development department to decide on the corruption charge and pass an order within one month; otherwise, the DVAC could commence the probe in accordance with the law, the judge held.