Chennai:
A.D.M.K. The case filed by O. Panneerselvam against the selection of Edappadi Palaniswami as the interim general secretary has reached the final stage in the Supreme Court.
ADMK held on July 11 last year. It was in the General Assembly that Edappadi Palaniswami was selected as the Interim General Secretary. On that morning, OPS went to Rayapetta head office with volunteers and administrators. When we went there, some unfortunate incidents took place.
Subsequently, a resolution was passed to remove O. Panneer Selva from the party. Ops against this. The case was first filed in the Chennai High Court.
In this, the verdict given by the single judge was in favor of OPS and the verdict given by the two-judge bench was in favor of Edappadi Palaniswami. OPS contested this decision. The trial in the Supreme Court is now at its final stage.
The trial of this case was intensified in the Supreme Court from last 4th. Advocates from both sides made heated arguments from their side. The case was adjourned after a three-day trial.
After the last 2 days of arguments and hearings, the judgment has been adjourned without specifying a date. Supreme Court Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Rishikesh Roy have adjourned the verdict saying that both the parties should file their arguments by the 16th.
Following this, the lawyers from Edappadi Palaniswami and O. Panneerselvam’s side are actively engaged in preparing the arguments in the court in written form.
ADMK on behalf of Edappadi Palaniswami. Senior advocate C.S. Vaithyanathan appeared and argued on behalf of the Chief Corporation. Senior Advocate Mukhuth Rothaki appeared on behalf of the General Committee and Chairman Tamilmakhanusen, while Senior Advocate Atulsithle and Advocates Balaji, Srinivasan and Gauthamkumar appeared on behalf of the Executive Committee. A report of about 15 pages is being prepared on their part. This report has been filed in the Supreme Court on 16th.
Senior advocate Vaidyanathan argued that the July 11 general committee meeting was held within party rules. He said that the argument of the petitioner that 15 days prior notice should be given is not acceptable.
They (the OPS party) knew that this meeting was being held. This has also been reported in the civil case filed on July 4. He also clarified that the party rules do not state that notice should be given 15 days before the general body meeting.
Senior advocate Mukul Rothaki argues that it is not correct to argue that Edappadi Palaniswami thought that if he was removed from the post, he could arbitrarily become the general secretary. A.D.M.K. He pointed out that the decision to abolish the OPS was taken only after the office was vandalized and the documents taken away. Such important information is to be included in the report to be filed in writing.
OPS Senior advocate Krishnakumar, appearing for the side, and senior advocate Ranjithkumar, appearing for Vairamuthu argued that the posts of coordinator and co-coordinator have been removed without any basic reason.
The two-judge bench argued that the Edappadi Palaniswami party acted contrary to the amendment of the party rules on December 1, 2021, which was fully accepted by the ADMK.
Earlier, OPS had made various arguments in the Supreme Court. The lawyers have taken it. Add all of them to OPS. The side is also expected to file a written statement on the 16th.
A.D.M.K. Anticipation on the case has increased after the arguments and trial in the Common Pleas case was adjourned. Is the judgment given by two judges of the High Court in favor of Edappadi Palaniswami valid? Not valid? The judges of the Supreme Court are going to say that.
ADMK after Pongal festival The verdict in the case of the General Assembly is about to be released. Who will get the ultimate victory in this? ADMK is It has increased expectations in the locality and in the Tamil Nadu political arena.