Rejecting activist ‘Traffic’ Ramaswamy’s plea seeking President’s rule in Tamil Nadu, the Madras High Court observed there are no serious instances of any unwarranted situation to impose emergency, much less a state emergency.
“On perusal of the petition, we feel that it has been filed only for publicity, not for anything else,” the First Bench comprising the then Acting Chief Justice Huluivadi G Ramesh and Justice S S Sundar said.
The judges said, “We are not agreeing with the contention of the petitioner that a law and order situation has arisen for imposing emergency.”
Ramaswamy submitted that he wanted the court to direct Rashtrapati Bhavan to consider his July 18 representation to the Tamil Nadu Governor to recommend to the President Ram Nath Kovind to invoke section 356 (1) (a) of the Constitution and to take charge of the home department of Tamil Nadu, including the state intelligence machinery.
According to the petitioner, the groundwater in Tuticorin district has been polluted due to Sterlite and the subsequent violence resulted in the death of 13 people.
This apart, there were ‘gross violations’ in hoisting digital and flex banners, in acquisition of land for constructing the eight-lane highway to Salem from Chennai, crime against children and allegations against police officials, the petitioner said and wanted the Governor to recommend Presidents rule in the state.
When the plea came up for hearing, the Bench said, “It is seen that certain incidents referred to were based on reports in the newspapers. There are no serious instances of any unwarranted situation to impose emergency, much less state emergency,” it said, adding, “One person may feel there is a law and order problem. For others, it is not so. It all depends on the individual’s perception.”