The Madras High Court on Tuesday held it was the duty of the State to provide necessary police protection for the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) general council and executive council meet scheduled at Vanagaram near Chennai on Thursday since there was an apprehension of violence due to a factional dispute.
Justice N. Sathish Kumar also agreed with senior counsel Vijay Narayan that mere calling of a meeting of the general council and the executive council could not be stalled by a faction of the party by objecting to grant of police permission and that it was up to the members of the two councils to take a final call on the agenda of the meet.
Since the Avadi police commissionerate had raised 31 queries regarding the event, the judge directed the writ petitioner P. Benjamin, a former Minister and incumbent Tiruvallur central district secretary of AIADMK, to provide clarification with respect to those queries by Tuesday itself so that the protection can be provided at the earliest.
“On obtaining such details, the respondents should ensure that proper protection will be given for the venue where the Executive Council and General Council Meeting is to be held,” the judge ordered. He also said it would be open to the police to barricade the venue, frisk the participants and prevent them from carrying weapons.
Stating that the members of the executive as well as general council must be provided with identity cards, the judge said, only those with identity cards and invitation must be allowed entry. The judge recorded the submission of Mr. Narayan that vehicle passes had already been issued to all the members of the two councils.
Senior counsel P.H. Arvindh Pandian, representing the party’s coordinator O. Panneerselvam, objected to grant of police protection for the event on the ground that neither the party nor its two leaders had approached the court. Stating that the writ petitioner was a third party, he said the petitioner had not been authorised to seek protection.
He questioned the maintainability of the writ petition and said Mr. Panneerselvam had given a representation to the police against grant of police protection for the event. However, the judge held that the dispute between the coordinator and co-coordinator Edappadi K. Palaniswami were not germane to the issue before the court.
“Mere internal dispute between them cannot be decided here. Only question arises is whether there can be a direction as sought by the petitioner in the writ petition. Petitioner is admittedly District Secretary of Tiruvallur District and member of AIADMK and former Minister for School Education and Sports and youth welfare.
“Therefore being member of AIADMK seeking protection is well within its rights. Therefore, the contention that he has no right to seek protection cannot be countenanced,” the judge wrote in his order and pointed out that the petitioner was entitled to obtain police protection since there was a serious apprehension of law and order problem.
Earlier, Mr. Narayan said the police wanted to know even the agenda of the meet and argued that it was none of their business to seek such details. However, the State Public Prosecutor said that the police were only concerned with the maintenance of law and order and that they do not require the agenda of the meet.
