The Madras High Court in the case O. Paneerselvam v. AIADMK and others observed and refused to interfere with the general council meeting of the All-India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK). The order of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy came in the morning, with its meeting scheduled to be held.
The petition was filled by former Chief Minister O Paneerselvam, to stall the meeting, it was argued by him that proper notice was not issued for conducting the meeting, as mandated by the bylaws of the party and as per the by-laws, the coordinator or the joint Coordinator, should have issued the notice to the meeting. It was observed that in the present case, the notice was issued by the headquarters office bearers, he argued.
While opposing the same, AIADMK Joint Coordinator, Edappadi Palaniswamy argued that what was issued was not a notice of the meeting, but an invitation to attend the meeting. It was also questioned by him that the suit filed by Paneerselvam against AIADMK when he himself was the coordinator of the party. However, it was argued argued that Paneerselvam has filed a civil suit against himself which is not maintainable. It was also pointed by him to the Supreme Court order permitting the conduct of the meeting and argued that the High Court should not interfere with the order of the Supreme Court.
While allowing the conduct of the meeting, according to the law, the court held that if anyone was aggrieved that the meeting was not conducted in accordance with law, to that effect, they could move with the civil suit.
The counsel, Senior Advocate Guru Krishnakumar appearing for Paneerselvam, while the counsel, Senior Advocate Vijay Narayan and SR Rajagopal, represented Palaniswamy.
It was argued that Paneerselvam has filed a civil suit against himself which is not maintainable. It was also pointed by him to the Supreme Court order permitting the conduct of the meeting and argued that the High Court should not interfere with the order of the Supreme Court.
