The Madras High Court bench here on Tuesday sought a reply from the secretary of the Home Department on a contempt petition filed by a social activist alleging that the State had failed to comply with the directions of the court by not appointing Directors of Prosecution in Tamil Nadu.
A division bench comprising Justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and P. Devadass issued a direction in this regard while hearing the case of K.R. Ramaswamy alias ‘Traffic’ Ramasamy, a social activist.
In his contempt petition, Mr Ramasamy alleged that in several districts the post of the Deputy Director of Prosecution was lying vacant for years with the additional public prosecutors being given additional charge.
An additional public prosecutor (grade I) from the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) court, Egmore, was in-charge for the posts of the director, the joint director and the deputy director of prosecution, he added.
According to Mr Ramaswamy, a division bench had passed an order in 2009 directing the State to appoint the Director and the Deputy Director of Prosecution as per Section 25-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 25-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure mandated a minimum experience of 10 years as a practising to qualify for appointment as the Director of Prosecution.
“More than five lakh lawyers are available in the State to fill the posts. The State is not filling the vacancies as if there are no lawyers available in Tamil Nadu.
One person is made in-charge of three key posts”, the petitioner contended through his counsel.
In his petition, Mr Ramaswamy claimed that, in addition to two representations he had sent a legal notice to the home department on January 24 this year on the issue of filling the vacancies. But he did not get a reply to date.
Therefore, he filed the contempt petition.
The judges issued the direction to the government and posted the case to next week for further hearing.
