<p>Thiruvananthapuram: A vigilance court here on Monday dismissed the petition filed by Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan seeking a court-monitored probe into the alleged financial transactions between a private mining company and the now-defunct IT company of T Veena, the daughter of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.</p>.<p>Kuzhalnadan had initially approached the Special Vigilance Court here, saying the Vigilance Department refused to probe the financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd. (CMRL) and Veena's company Exalogic.</p>.<p>Later, he changed his stance and sought a court-monitored probe into the alleged financial transactions.</p>.<p>The court dismissed the plea after a detailed hearing on the documents submitted by the Congress legislator.</p>.HC appoints amicus in plea for vigilance probe into Kerala CM's daughter's financial transactions with pvt company.<p>Meanwhile, Kuzhalnadan said the order was unexpected and will take further action after going through the judgement.</p>.<p>Earlier, a Vigilance Special Court, Muvattupuzha, had dismissed a plea by a social activist for an investigation into the alleged illegal financial transactions between CMRL, Veena's firm, and the suspected political leaders for want of evidence.</p>.<p>The High Court is currently hearing a revision petition challenging that order in the matter.</p>.Plea seeking vigilance probe against Kerala CM Vijayan, his daughter rejected by court.<p>A controversy had erupted in Kerala after media reports that the CMRL had paid a total of Rs 1.72 crore to the CM's daughter between 2017 and 2020.</p>.<p>The reports cited the ruling of an interim board for settlement and said that CMRL previously had an agreement with Veena's IT firm for consulting and software support services.</p>.<p>It was also alleged that though no service was rendered by her firm, the amount was paid on a monthly basis 'due to her relationship with a prominent person.' The report also cited findings by the Registrar of Companies (ROC) against her firm.</p>.<p>Quoting the ROC report, the Congress-led UDF opposition claimed that offences of receiving money using false documents and without providing services had been committed by Veena's firm.</p>
<p>Thiruvananthapuram: A vigilance court here on Monday dismissed the petition filed by Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan seeking a court-monitored probe into the alleged financial transactions between a private mining company and the now-defunct IT company of T Veena, the daughter of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.</p>.<p>Kuzhalnadan had initially approached the Special Vigilance Court here, saying the Vigilance Department refused to probe the financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd. (CMRL) and Veena's company Exalogic.</p>.<p>Later, he changed his stance and sought a court-monitored probe into the alleged financial transactions.</p>.<p>The court dismissed the plea after a detailed hearing on the documents submitted by the Congress legislator.</p>.HC appoints amicus in plea for vigilance probe into Kerala CM's daughter's financial transactions with pvt company.<p>Meanwhile, Kuzhalnadan said the order was unexpected and will take further action after going through the judgement.</p>.<p>Earlier, a Vigilance Special Court, Muvattupuzha, had dismissed a plea by a social activist for an investigation into the alleged illegal financial transactions between CMRL, Veena's firm, and the suspected political leaders for want of evidence.</p>.<p>The High Court is currently hearing a revision petition challenging that order in the matter.</p>.Plea seeking vigilance probe against Kerala CM Vijayan, his daughter rejected by court.<p>A controversy had erupted in Kerala after media reports that the CMRL had paid a total of Rs 1.72 crore to the CM's daughter between 2017 and 2020.</p>.<p>The reports cited the ruling of an interim board for settlement and said that CMRL previously had an agreement with Veena's IT firm for consulting and software support services.</p>.<p>It was also alleged that though no service was rendered by her firm, the amount was paid on a monthly basis 'due to her relationship with a prominent person.' The report also cited findings by the Registrar of Companies (ROC) against her firm.</p>.<p>Quoting the ROC report, the Congress-led UDF opposition claimed that offences of receiving money using false documents and without providing services had been committed by Veena's firm.</p>