Blatant Misuse of Powers under Article 227 by Some Corrupt Madras High Court Judges

Together with the active help, support and willful wrong intervention of two judges of the Madras High Court, the trustees have legally harassed us using the backdoor entry under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. These judges are Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar. A gist of their misuse of discretionary power of supervision is cited below.

1. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.3314/2007, filed under Article 227 by the trustees on an interim petition granting food, shelter, clothing, medical and all other basic needs and necessities of life. He passed perverse order on 29.01.2008 containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
2. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained M.P. No.1/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007, again filed by trustees for clarification, using for a second time Article 227. He indiscriminately exercised his powers of supervision for a second time and passed perverse order dated 04.08.2008 illegally modifying his first order dated 29.01.2008, containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
3. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007, again filed by trustees for a second clarification, for a third time, again using Article 227. He indiscriminately exercised his powers of supervision for a third time and passed perverse exparte order dated 21.06.2010 illegally modifying his first two orders dated 29.01.2008 and 04.08.2008, containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
4. Justice K. Venkataraman ought to have issued notices to us either through court or directed the trustees to issue private notices to us, in view of the fact that our lawyer had given up Vakalat. He unjustly passed an order dated 21.06.2010 in our absence without giving us a just and fair opportunity to defend ourselves.
5. Having appointed suo motto an Advocate Commissioner, Justice K. Venkataraman failed to base his order dated 21.06.2010 on the report of the Advocate Commissioner. He waited for about 1 ½ years from the date of submission of the report of the Advocate Commissioner to pass his order dated 21.06.2010. He passed exparte order after having unjustly eschewed the line contained in the report that clearly indicated the harassment and victimization caused by Ashram trustees to us.
6. The orders passed by Justice K. Venkataraman dated 29.01.2008, 04.08.2008 and 21.06.2010, using his discretionary power of supervision under Article 227, are perverse, bad in law and were illegally modified under guise of clarification to metamorphose into an eviction proceeding which was not the prayer of the trustees in any of their petitions in the first place.
7. Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.4219/2010 filed by the trustees, once again under Article 227. They blatantly misused discriminatory supervisory powers and admitted the CRP since the trustees had failed to prefer an appeal at the Pondicherry Appellate Authority and had jumped the necessary legal steps before approaching High Court.
8. Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.4219/2010 filed by the trustees under Article 227, on an interim petition restoring food and shelter to us since the third party had failed to comply with the Order dated 21.06.2010.
9. Justice S. Manikumar passed perverse order dated 03.08.2012 in C.R.P. No.4219/2010 disregarding the principles of natural justice, balance of convenience and facts and circumstances of the case. He based his order dated 03.08.2012 by further modifying the three illegal orders already passed in C.R.P. No.3314 of 2007 dated 29.01.2008, 04.08.2008 and 21.06.2010 by Justice K. Venkataraman, by colluding with him.
10. Justice S. Manikumar passed final order after more than one year (containing two summer vacations) of hearing the final arguments. He failed to appreciate the case in C.R.P. No.4219/2010 on its own merits because the facts and circumstances and cause of action were different from those in C.R.P. No.3314/2010 and deserved impartial and independent evaluation of the case.
11. Since trial in O.S. No.409/2005 had already begun and was underway, Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar ought to have waited for the final outcome of the trial before passing orders dated 21.06.2010 and 03.08.2012. They wrongly entertained revisions on interim injunction petitions, exercised discriminate supervisory powers under Article 227 and passed outright eviction orders, a prayer neither made by the trustees nor by us, resulting in an absolutely blatant miscarriage of justice.