Transfer of Tasmac cases: TN govt disrespected Madras HC, says Justice Subramaniam

Justice S.M. Subramaniam pointed out that the state government, despite agreeing to argue a batch of cases related to the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) search and seizure operation at Tasmac headquarters, had simultaneously approached the Supreme Court seeking a transfer of the cases.

Presiding over a Division Bench alongside Justice K. Rajasekar, Justice Subramaniam questioned the state's intentions, asking whether it was interested in safeguarding public interest or merely protecting a few Tasmac officials who are under the ED's scrutiny.

Addressing the state government pleader, Edwin Prabhakar, the judge said, "You are unfair to the court proceedings. You are disrespecting and insulting the High Court."

In response, the State Government Pleader defended the move, stating that the writ petitions were filed in the interest of the state's welfare and to protect the rights of individual citizens.

He explained that the ED had served a 46-page counter-affidavit only on the evening of March 30, a Sunday, and therefore the petitioners required additional time to prepare a detailed rejoinder before starting arguments.

However, Justice Subramaniam recalled that during the hearing of the writ petitions on April 1, 2025, the court had recorded the petitioners' consent to complete the pleadings by April 7 and commence final arguments on April 8.

He questioned why, after agreeing to that schedule, the state had approached the Supreme Court without informing the High Court.

"The government could have disclosed its intention either on April 1 or at least when the cases were taken up at 11 a.m. today. But instead, it chose to reveal the filing of the transfer petition only after the cases were passed over and taken up post noon," the judge noted.

He further remarked, "So, you have agreed for a final hearing here, and behind our back, you have filed a transfer petition before the Supreme Court."

While acknowledging that the government had every right to approach the Supreme Court, Justice Subramaniam emphasised that the manner in which the transfer plea was filed was neither fair nor proper.