The Supreme Court on September 12 said the attachment of the AIADMK party office was an "extreme" measure in a democracy even as it did not entertain former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam's plea against a Madras High Court order which later gave the building's keys to rival Edappadi K. Palaniswami.
A Bench led by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud said the High Court’s decision two months ago has more or less restored the peace.
The trouble began when the followers of Mr. Panneerselvam and Mr. Palaniswami had clashed outside the party headquarters following a general council meeting on July 11. The meeting had seen the reported expulsion of Mr. Panneerselvam from the party.
The violence had led the South Chennai Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) to lock, seal and attach the party headquarters.
The High Court, acting on the respective appeals of both leaders, set aside the Revenue Department's order and gave the possession of the office building to Mr. Palaniswami. Mr. Panneerselvam had moved the Supreme Court in appeal.
"To attach the office of a political party is an extraordinary measure. In a democracy, will you not allow political parties to function? This is a dispute between two factions of a party and not to be treated like a dispute between neighbours," Justice Chandrachud observed.
The court said the clash happened outside the party office. In that case, it was a law and order problem.
"No matter how rowdy a manner the clash was… you cannot go on to attach the property. The FIR on the incident is conspicuously silent about the attachment of the property," the Bench noted.
Shutting down a political party office for a law and order problem… not allowing the party to function, may lead to worse excesses, the court noted.
Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi, K.V. Vishwanathan and Huzefa Ahmedi and advocate Balaji Srinivasan appeared for Mr. Palaniswami, and senior advocates Ranjit Kumar and Guru Krishnakumar for Mr. Panneerselvam.
