Madras HC allows AIADMK to hold polls but directs it not to declare results
The court wants that the results are not announced till it has disposed of a plea filed by Manoj Pandian, a member of O Paneerselvam faction.
The Madras High Court on Sunday allowed All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam’s election proceedings for the general secretary post to continue but directed that the results cannot be announced, reported ANI.
The court said that the results cannot be passed till petitions filed by expelled AIADMK leader Manoj Pandian is disposed. Pandian has challenged the resolutions passed on July 11 general council meeting during which the Alangulam MLA and former chief minister O Paneerselvam were expeleld from the party. Edappadi K Palaniswami was appointed as the interim general secretary in that meeting.
The election to the AIADMK’s general secretary post is to take place on March 26. In a statement on Saturday, the Paneerselvam-led faction claimed in a statement that the election was announced against the party bylaws.
“Meanwhile few people are spreading the news that AIADMK coordinator O Pannerselvam has also filed nomination for the general secretary post,” it added. “This is only to create confusion among the cadres. This is totally false news.”
The court decided to continue arguments on the interim plea on March 22.
Panneerselvam had moved the Madras High Court after he was expelled during the July 11 meeting. A single bench of Justice G Jayachandran had ruled on August 17 that the July 11 general council meeting was invalid. In his order, Jayachandran had held that any general council meeting in future should be convened jointly by both leaders.
However, on September 2, a division bench of the Madras High Court set aside the single judge order. Panneerselvam then approached the Supreme Court against the September order.
The Supreme Court also upheld the Madras High Court order allowing Palaniswami to be AIADMK’s interim general secretary. The court, however, clarified that the court’s ruling is limited to the High Court’s orders and will not have any bearing on the question of leadership.