‘Verdict reinforces boundary between govt. and judiciary’

This is a lesson for Opposition for trying to bring disrepute to govt., says Minister

The ruling All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) and the State government on Friday expressed happiness over the Madras High Court’s decision of dismissing a petition demanding disqualification of 11 legislators including Deputy Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam.

Speaking to journalists on the sidelines of a government function at his hometown in Salem district, Chief Minister Edappadi K Palaniswami welcomed the court’s ruling.

Terming the verdict “very significant,” Tamil Culture-Official Language Minister ‘Ma Foi’ K. Pandiarajan, who was one of the legislators against whom the petition was filed, said the court, while declining to direct Assembly Speaker P. Dhanapal on the matter, had only reinforced the boundaries between legislature and judiciary, given the fact that Tamil Nadu had a long history of “friction” between the two arms of the State. “This augurs well for democracy,” Mr. Pandiarajan said. pointed out.

Fisheries Minister D. Jayakumar, regarded as de facto spokesperson of the Cabinet, also referred to the High Court’s verdict of dismissing another petition concerning the display of portrait of former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa on the Assembly chamber and said the party was “doubly happy” over the two orders.

C.Ve. Shanmugam, Law Minister, said the Opposition, which had been “hell-bent” upon bringing “disrepute” to the government, was taught a “fitting lesson.”

Rival camp upset

Thanga Tamilselvan, a disqualified legislator owing allegiance to founder of the Amma Makkal Munnetra Kazhagam (AMMK) T.T.V. Dhinakaran, and one of the petitioners who sought the intervention of the court, felt sad over the development. He wondered why the court took such a long time to come to the conclusion that it could not issue any direction to the Speaker.

The court should have delivered its judgment first on a petition challenging the Speaker’s decision of disqualifying him and 17 others as “in the 18 constituencies, my colleagues and I are not able to function as elected representatives.” But, in respect of the case concerning Mr. Panneerselvam and 10 others, there was no such issue, Mr. Tamilselvan added.