Why are you bothered about AMMK?’:

[12/6, 07:24] Sekarreporter: ‘Why are you bothered about AMMK?’: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/why-are-you-bothered-about-ammk/article30199476.ece
[12/6, 07:25] Sekarreporter: Pugazhendi files a case in HC
The Madras High Court on Thursday questioned the locus standi of Amma Makkal Munnetra Kazhagam (AMMK) leader T.T.V. Dhinakaran’s former supporter V. Pugazhendi to file a case against the proposed registration of the party with the Election Commission.
Justice C.V. Karthikeyan wondered why was the petitioner bothered about the registration of the party when it was his case that he had walked out of it though the party as such was yet to expel him officially.
[12/6, 07:25] Sekarreporter: The judge was concerned that the litigant should not end up using the court to settle scores.
When the petitioner’s counsel pointed out that his client had submitted an affidavit along with 99 others before the EC, supporting the registration of AMMK, the judge said he could have simply asked the EC to ignore that affidavit at the time of considering the AMMK’s plea for registration.
Later, the judge granted time for ECI’s counsel to obtain instructions and adjourned the hearing to Monday.
He further rejected a plea by Tamil Maran of Puducherry to get himself impleaded in the writ petition filed by Mr. Pugazhendi in order to support the prayer sought for by the petitioners.
Stating that no person could be made a respondent to support the cause of a writ petitioner, the judge said Mr. Maran would have to file a separate writ petition if he desired to do so.Why are you bothered about AMMK?’: [12/6, 07:24] Sekarreporter: ‘Why are you bothered about AMMK?’: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/why-are-you-bothered-about-ammk/article30199476.ece
[12/6, 07:25] Sekarreporter: Pugazhendi files a case in HC
The Madras High Court on Thursday questioned the locus standi of Amma Makkal Munnetra Kazhagam (AMMK) leader T.T.V. Dhinakaran’s former supporter V. Pugazhendi to file a case against the proposed registration of the party with the Election Commission.
Justice C.V. Karthikeyan wondered why was the petitioner bothered about the registration of the party when it was his case that he had walked out of it though the party as such was yet to expel him officially.
[12/6, 07:25] Sekarreporter: The judge was concerned that the litigant should not end up using the court to settle scores.
When the petitioner’s counsel pointed out that his client had submitted an affidavit along with 99 others before the EC, supporting the registration of AMMK, the judge said he could have simply asked the EC to ignore that affidavit at the time of considering the AMMK’s plea for registration.
Later, the judge granted time for ECI’s counsel to obtain instructions and adjourned the hearing to Monday.
He further rejected a plea by Tamil Maran of Puducherry to get himself impleaded in the writ petition filed by Mr. Pugazhendi in order to support the prayer sought for by the petitioners.
Stating that no person could be made a respondent to support the cause of a writ petitioner, the judge said Mr. Maran would have to file a separate writ petition if he desired to do so.

Leave a Reply

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

Call Now ButtonCALL ME