Madras High Court Moves Plea Challenging Appointment of Astrologer as OSD to Tamil Nadu CM Vijay

May 13, 2026 : A petition has been filed before the Madras High Court challenging the appointment of astrologer Rickey Radhan Pandit Vettrivel as Officer on Special Duty (Political) to Vijay, the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.

The matter was mentioned for urgent listing before a Vacation Bench comprising Justices Victoria Gowri and N. Senthilkumar, and is likely to be heard on Thursday.

The petition, filed by practising advocate R. Rathi, seeks issuance of a writ of quo warranto questioning the authority under which Vettrivel holds the post of OSD (Political) to the Chief Minister.

According to the plea, Vettrivel had earlier predicted that Vijay’s party, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), would emerge as a major political force and that Vijay would become Chief Minister after the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections.

The petitioner alleged that the appointment was granted solely as a reward for Vettrivel’s astrological predictions and lacked any statutory or constitutional basis. The plea described the appointment as arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to established principles governing public employment.

The challenge is directed against proceedings issued by the Public Department of the Tamil Nadu government on May 12, 2026, appointing Vettrivel to the post with effect from the date of assumption of office.

It was contended that the appointment was made without inviting applications, framing recruitment rules, issuing a notification or conducting any transparent selection process. The petitioner argued that the move violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before law and equal opportunity in public employment.

Reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi, wherein the Court held that appointments to public posts must conform to the constitutional scheme and cannot be made through backdoor methods.

The plea further stated that the appointment order had been circulated to the Pay and Accounts Office and the Accountant General, indicating that the post was funded from the public exchequer. On that basis, the petitioner argued that the office required lawful creation of the post, budgetary sanction, prescribed pay scale, eligibility criteria and a valid recruitment mechanism.

It was further alleged that the appointment order was issued merely on the basis of an internal office note from the Chief Minister’s Office and was influenced by political considerations. The petitioner also contended that the order did not specify the terms and conditions of appointment, allegedly to avoid judicial scrutiny.

The plea sought a declaration that Vettrivel’s appointment was unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary and void. It also sought quashing of the appointment proceedings dated May 12 and interim relief restraining him from functioning as Officer on Special Duty to the Chief Minister during the pendency of the case.