Political parties and the law: India

From Indpaedia
Revision as of 07:30, 8 July 2022 by Jyoti Sharma (Jyoti) (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Hindi English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.
Additional information may please be sent as messages to the Facebook
community, Indpaedia.com. All information used will be gratefully
acknowledged in your name.


Internal Matters

Courts Can’t Interfere: SC

Dhananjay Mahapatra, July 7, 2022: The Times of India


New Delhi: Frowning at the Madras HC’s intervention in the situation arising from factional feud in AIADMK, the Supreme Court said judiciary can’t assume jurisdiction to fix parameters for decision making on internal matters of a political party.


Unfettering the general council of AIADMK to decide what it deems fit in its July 11 meeting, a bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari said, “Can a court pass orders to a party on how it should conduct its meetings? Who wants to do what in a party is essentially a matter for the party. ”


The feud in the principal opposition party in Tamil Nadu had reached SC with Edapaddi K Palaniswamy challenging the June 23 order of a division bench of the Madras HC allowing rival O Panneerselvam the power to veto any resolution for single leadership in the party. The SC bench stayed the June 23 order.

Appearing for Palaniswamy, advocate CS Vaidyanathan said the Panneerselvam faction has moved the HC seeking initiation of contempt proceedings for alleged violation of HC or- ders during the June 23 meeting of the general council. He said the next meeting is fixed for July 11.

The Panneerselvam faction, through advocate Maninder Singh, accused the other faction of attempting to destabilise the party.

“Can we fix the boundaries for the general council? Is it within our jurisdiction? The party must work out its disputes within the party,” the bench said. “It’s necessary and expedient to stay the HC’s June 23 order in view of the other steps and proceedings (contempt) taken up or likely to be taken up pursuant to observations/ directions of the HC and in view of the questions raised in the present petition (by Palaniswamy). Meeting of general council of AIADMK on July 11 will proceed in accordance with law. . . The single judge of HC is free to proceed with issues pending before him,” it added.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox
Translate