A Division Bench, comprising, Justices V Ramasubramanian and M M Sundaresh, said that the writ petition cannot be entertained as it was "not maintainable."
Advocate K Bharathi in his petition submitted that an advertisement in a vernacular daily showed Justice M Vijayaraghavan of the Madras High Court with his wife, his newly married son and daughter-in-law along with the Chief Minister.
He further submitted that there was a message at the bottom of the advertisement thanking the Chief Minister for having blessed the newly wed and contended that the judge would not henceforth be able to discharge his functions in an unbiased manner and it would tarnish the judiciary image.
Rejecting the petitioner's contention, the bench said it was based only upon presumptions and surmises and there was no proof to show that the advertisement was actually issued either by the judge or at his behest.
"If an objection is made to the continuance in office of a person, who is a judge of any High Court, the same could be done only in impeachment proceedings," the bench said.
