2016 Supreme(Mad) 214
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.R. SHIVAKUMAR, J.
P. Kamaraj & Ors. - Petitioners
Vs.
All India P&T SC/ST Employees Welfare Association & Ors. - Respondents
Tr.C.M.P.No.776/2015 and C.R.P.(PD) Nos.4038 and 4333 of 2015
Decided On : 08.02.2016
Advocate Appeared:
For Petitioners in Tr.C.M.P.No.776/2015 and C.R.P.(PD) No.4038/2015: Mr. N. Rajan for Mr. P.S. Amalraj.
For Petitioner in C.R.P.(PD) No.4333/2015: Mr. R. Malaichamy.
For Respondents in Tr.C.M.P.No.776/2015 and C.R.P.(PD) No.4038/2015: Mr. K.P. Dinesh for R1, Mr. R. Malaichamy for R3 to R8, No Appearance for R2.
For Respondents in C.R.P.(PD) No.4333/2015: Mr. P.S. Amalraj for R1 & R2, K.P. Dinesh for R3, No Appearance for R4.
Proper course of action for seeking relief and the grant of an interim injunction against certain respondents from functioning as members of the Ad hoc Committee until a specified date.
Headnote:
withdrawn - Election Dispute - [Constitution of India, Article 227] - The court dismissed the petitioners' request for a stay order, stating that the proper course of action was to seek an injunction against the appointment of an Ad hoc Committee. The court deemed the petition for a stay as a request for injunction and directed the petitioners to file a civil miscellaneous appeal against the rejection of the injunction. The court also granted an interim injunction against certain respondents from functioning as members of the Ad hoc Committee until a specified date.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were elected as President and Secretary of an association but faced opposition from the second respondent who appointed an Ad hoc Committee. They sought an interim injunction against the interference with their functioning and a stay of the Ad hoc Committee's operation.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petitioners' request for a stay order, stating that the proper course of action was to seek an injunction against the appointment of an Ad hoc Committee. The court deemed the petition for a stay as a request for injunction and directed the petitioners to file a civil miscellaneous appeal against the rejection of the injunction. The court also granted an interim injunction against certain respondents from functioning as members of the Ad hoc Committee until a specified date.
Issues: Dispute over the election of the President and Secretary of an association, interference by the second respondent, and the appointment of an Ad hoc Committee.
Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified the proper course of action for seeking relief and directed the petitioners to file a civil miscellaneous appeal against the rejection of the injunction. The court also granted an interim injunction against certain respondents from functioning as members of the Ad hoc Committee until a specified date.
Final Decision: The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed as unnecessary. C.R.P.No.4038/2015 was dismissed, granting leave to the petitioners to approach the lower appellate court with a civil miscellaneous appeal against the rejection of the injunction. The petitioners were given a week's time to prefer such an appeal before the lower appellate court. The court also granted an interim injunction against certain respondents from functioning as members of the Ad hoc Committee until a specified date.
The learned counsel appearing for C.R.P. (PD) No.4333/2015 submits that the petitioners therein have been advised to withdraw the civil revision petition and hence he would pray for the dismissal of the said civil revision petition as withdrawn. The learned counsel has also made an endorsement in C.R.P.(PD) No.4333/2015 to the above said effect. The endorsement is recorded and C.R.P.(PD) No.4333/2015 is dismissed as withdrawn.
2. The petitioners in C.R.P.(PD) No.4038/2015 are also the petitioners in Tr.C.M.P.No.776/2015. For the purpose of election to the office bearers of the Tamil Nadu Circle of the first respondent Association, namely All India P&T SC/ST Employees Welfare Association, Annual General Body meeting of the Tamil Nadu Circle was convened on 19.07.2015. According to the petitioners, the election was conducted in which, the petitioners were elected as President and Secretary respectively. It is the further contention of the petitioners that the second respondent, who is the Secretary General of the All India P&T SC/ST Employees Welfare Association, supported the defeated candidates and walked out of the meeting after the petitioners were declared elected; that with a view to prevent the petitioners in C.R.P.(PD) No.4038/2015 from acting as President and Secretary of the Executive Body of the Tamil Nadu circle of the first respondent Association, the second respondent, highhandedly appointed an Ad hoc Committee consisting of the defeated candidates superseding the election and that therefore, they had to approach the trial court (XVI Assistant Jude, City Civil Court, Chennai) with the suit for a declaration that they were duly elected as President and Secretary respectively, of the Executive Body of the Tamil Nadu circle of the first defendant Association and consequential reliefs.
3. Pending disposal of the suit filed by them, namely O.S.No.4384/2015 on the file of XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai sought an order of interim injunction against respondents 2 to 8 not to interfere with their functioning as President and Secretary of the Executive Body of the Tamil Nadu Circle of the first respondent Association. The said application was numbered as I.A.No.11176/2015. Along with the said application, the petitioners filed another interlocutory application in I.A.No.11177/2015 with a prayer for interim stay of operation of the order of the second respondent appointing Ad hoc Committee.
4. The learned trial judge, after hearing both sides, by a common order dated 31.08.2015 dismissed both the interlocutory applications. As against the dismissal of I.A.No.11176/2015, the petitioners have filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.104/2015 on the file of the XVII Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. As against the dismissal of I.A.No.11177/2015, the petitioners have approached this court with C.R.P.(PD) No.4038/2015 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
5. Since the order challenged in C.M.A.No.104/2015 on the file of the XVII Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai and the order challenged in C.R.P.(PD) No.4038/2015 have been incorporated in the common order of the trial court dated 31.08.2015, the petitioners have come forward with Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition No.776/2015. Upon hearing the submissions made on both sides, this court is able to find that the order of the second respondent, which was sought to be impugned in the suit and regarding which I.A.No.11177/2015 came to be filed, was not an order either of a Court or a Quasi Judicial Authority or an Administrative Authority whose order shall have a statutory force. The proper course to have been adopted by the petitioners was to seek an order of injunction not to implement the order of the second respondent appointing Ad hoc Committee and an injunction against the members of the Ad hoc Committee not to function as members of the Ad hoc Committee so as to prevent the exercise of their right as President and Secret