Chennai, June 23 (Representative) In a major relief to former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Opposition AIADMK coordinator O Panneer selvam, the Madras High Court in the wee hours of Thursday directed the AIADMK General Council not to amend any bye-laws (on strong demand for unitary leadership inlieu of the present dual leadership) beyond the 23 draft resolutions givento OPS. After a back-to-back hearing from 2.40 am, a division bench of Justice M Duraiswamy and Justice Sunder Mohan passed the orders around4.45 am. OPS’s supporter and GC member Shanmugam had challenged theorder of a single judge allowing the AIADMK to conduct its GC andshall pass any resolutions. Hours after Justice Krishnan Ramasamy passed an order in favourof opposition leader and party joint coordinator Edappadi K Palaniswami, the OPS faction requested the Chief Justice of Madras HC Munishwar Nath Bhandari for the late-night hearing of their appeal petition. As the CJ approved by 11.30 PM late last night, the division bench sat at Justice M Duraiswamy’s house and heard the matter.
Senior Advocate Arvindh Pandian appearing for OPS submitted that is client had given nod to 23 draft agendas and if there is any other resolution beyond these 23, the coordinator will not give his consent. Former AG A Vijay Narayan, defending Palani swami argued that anythingcan happen in GC meet as per the wish of the AIADMK GC members.It may be noted that after prolonged arguments by both the parties, OPS opposing any resolution on unitary leadership and the EPS supporters demanding a single leadership, the high court lastnight cleared the decks for Palani swami’s elevation as the general secretary of the party despite spirited attempts by OPS and refused to pass any direction against holding today’s general council meetingor amending the bye-laws to pave way for the elevation. “It is for the GC and its members to decide and pass resolutions,and this court cannot interfere with the process of conducting theGC meeting. Therefore, this court is not inclined to pass anyinterim orders/directions, except making it clear that the GCmeet shall go on,” said Justice Krishnan Ramasamy in the order.
The judge held that it was well settled that the court normally doesnot interfere in matters of internal issues of an association or party. “Courts will leave it open to the association/party and its membersto pass resolutions dismissing particular bye-law, rule or regulationfor better administration of the party. Since any decision comesforth among the members of the General Council, it is well within their collective wisdom and this court cannot insist the member sact upon in a particular manner,” the judge added. The court delivered the order after rejecting the pleas by AIADMK members, including N Thanikachalam, B Ramkumar Adityan, Suren Palanisamy, and general council member Shanmugam, who sought a direction restricting AIADMK and its coordinators from conducting the GC meet and passing a special resolution to amend the party bye-laws. Appearing for AIADMK coordinator O Panneerselvam, senior counsel PH Aravindh Pandian submitted that no resolution inrespect of any amendment of bye-laws should be passed without due process. According to him, as per Rule 20-A, the coordinator and joint coordinator were elected through the GC meet in December 2021, and the same was valid for the next five years.
Thus,it was unnecessary to amend the bye-laws now, he added. Meanwhile, Palani swami’s counsel senior advocate S Vijay Narayan submitted that no agenda was circulated when the general secretary position was abolished and coordinator and joint coordinator positions were created in 2017 in a GC meet. The agenda was put forth only during the meeting, he pointed out. “As per the wishes of the GC members, any resolution can bepassed on the floor of the meeting and it is for the GC to consideror reject the same,” he submitted. Recording the submissions, the judge held that he could not passany interim injunction against the GC meet and directed there spondents to file a response on July 11.In a swift action, Shanmugham challenged the Single Judgeorder late in the night and pleaded before the CJ following whichthe division bench restrained the GC from amending any party bye-laws (favouring elevation of EPS as General Secretaryunder unitary leadership).