Madras High Court Issues Vigilance Probe in Alleged Transport Fraud
The Madras High Court has mandated a thorough investigation by the vigilance department concerning allegations of fraudulent activities within the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC). The Court’s directive, issued on Wednesday by Justice B. Pugalendhi of the Madurai Bench, responds to claims that a single TNSTC bus was falsely reported as three separate buses operating on the same route. This order stems from the case Murugesan Vs Additional Chief Secretary.
The complaint, which was brought before the Court, alleges that buses were not being run on their approved routes and that fake records were created. The fraudulent documentation purportedly allowed for the misappropriation of funds allocated for tickets, diesel, salaries, and other operational expenses. The Court highlighted that the Transport Corporation itself acknowledged the creation of such falsified documents concerning Bus No. TN-57-N-2084, which was supposed to operate between Vedasandur and Trichy on July 16, 2022.
Serious Allegations Demand Comprehensive Investigation
Justice Pugalendhi emphasized the gravity of the allegations and criticized the insufficient disciplinary actions taken against lower-level employees. “Three different sets of tickets were issued for Route Nos. 515A, 601B, and 680A to passengers traveling on Route No. 601,” the Court observed, noting that this deception was part of a scheme to misappropriate diesel expenses and salary funds. The Court further criticized the vigilance department for merely forwarding the complaint to the transport department instead of conducting a diligent investigation.
Expressing concerns over the vigilance department’s operational efficacy, the Court noted, “It is regrettable that the Vigilance Department, tasked with monitoring 14 lakh government employees, is functioning inadequately with only 100 employees. Their limited capacity results in approximately 100 cases filed annually, mostly forwarded to respective departments without substantial action.”
Implications of the Fraud Allegations
The writ petition was brought forward by S. Murugesan, a dismissed employee of the Transport Corporation, who alleged that higher officials compelled conductors to issue multiple sets of tickets, fabricating records of multiple buses operating a single route. This practice, he claimed, facilitated the misappropriation of funds allocated for operational costs.
More Read
In its defense, the Transport Corporation admitted that an audit inspection revealed irregularities in the Vedasandur-Trichy route operations. It was discovered that computer-generated tickets for different routes were issued for the same bus. Consequently, disciplinary action resulted in a year-long increment stoppage for Branch Manager B. Karthick Raja and Junior Assistant P. Sivaraj, a measure the High Court deemed inadequate.
The Court expressed concerns regarding the scope of the fraud, questioning if such practices were limited to one route or prevalent across other routes. It also called into question whether higher-ranking officials might be implicated in the scheme. The Corporation’s argument that the petitioner lacked the standing to file the case was dismissed by the Court, which underscored the public interest nature of the allegations.
The Court has instructed the vigilance department to investigate the complaint thoroughly and take appropriate action if irregularities are confirmed, with a status report due by September 3, 2026. The petitioner was represented by Advocate P. Balamurugan, while Special Government Pleader C. Venkatesh Kumar represented the State authorities. Standing Counsel SC Herold Singh appeared for the Transport Corporation, with Advocate D. Sivaraman assisting as amicus curiae.
