The date was fixed at the request of advocate R. Neelakandan, representing the writ petitioner Chief Justice Amreshwar Pratap Sahi and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy of the Madras High Court on Tuesday decided to hear on November 10, a writ petition filed by DMK president M.K. Stalin in 2017, challenging the passing of a vote of confidence moved by Chief Minister Edappadi K. Palaniswami in the Legislative Assembly on February 18, 2017.

NEWS STATES TAMIL NADU
TAMIL NADU
HC to hear on November 10, a case filed by Stalin against 2017 vote of confidence in Legislative Assembly
Legal Correspondent
CHENNAI 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 15:28 IST
UPDATED: 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 15:28 IST

The date was fixed at the request of advocate R. Neelakandan, representing the writ petitioner
Chief Justice Amreshwar Pratap Sahi and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy of the Madras High Court on Tuesday decided to hear on November 10, a writ petition filed by DMK president M.K. Stalin in 2017, challenging the passing of a vote of confidence moved by Chief Minister Edappadi K. Palaniswami in the Legislative Assembly on February 18, 2017.

The date was fixed at the request of advocate R. Neelakandan, representing the writ petitioner. The lawyer told the court that five other connected writ petitions had to be listed along with Mr. Stalin’s writ petition against the vote of confidence, and hence the court may fix any date for the hearing of all cases together after the Dussehra holidays in the end of October. He told the court that Advocate General Vijay Narayan too, had agreed for an adjournment of the case.

Advertising

Advertising
When the Chief Justice wanted to know what were the other connected cases, Mr. Neelakandan said that a writ of quo warranto was also pending against Deputy Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam and Minister for Tamil culture MaFoi K. Pandiarajan. Since both of them and their faction of MLAs had voted against the vote of confidence moved by the Chief Minister in February 2017 but got inducted into the Cabinet subsequently on the basis of a truce entered between them (Mr. Panneerselvam and Mr. Palaniswami factions), the plea had been moved to remove them from office on the grounds that they had no authority to remain a part of the government against which they voted.

A few other cases were also pending in connection with various resolutions passed by the Legislative Assembly, the lawyer said. After recording his submissions, the judges said they would examine whether the cases were connected and had to be heard together. They also directed the Registry to list all the cases on November 10 since both sides were agreeable to the date.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Now ButtonCALL ME