MIC president G Palanivel, vice-president S Sothinathan and two others filed a judicial review application on Feb 24, challenging a decision made by the Registrar of Societies (ROS) against the party.

Also named as respondents in the application is the home minister, under whose ministry the ROS comes.

It is understood that leave (or permission) on whether the judicial review will be heard on its merits will be fully heard in Kuala Lumpur, before High Court judge Asmabi Mohamad, next Monday.

A judicial review application is filed to get leave or permission for a case to be heard, so as to ensure the application is not frivolous and vexatious.

Only after leave is provided will the case be heard on its merits.

This application is the second filed by MIC. The earlier application has been filed by MIC central executive member and strategy director K Ramalingam.

Besides Palanivel and Sothinathan ( left ), the other two are MIC public officer A Pakas Rao and S Balakrishnan.

The four are basically seeking a court order to quash the ROS order dated Dec 5 last year, asking the MIC to re-hold the elections for the party’s vice-presidents and central executive committee within three months.

They also wanted the ROS order for fresh elections to the various divisions and branches it named to be quashed as well.

In addition, Palanivel and three others also want the court to also quash the ROS letter dated Dec 31, which recognises the dispute among the delegates over the number of delegates who attended party annual general meeting and the number of ballot papers issued.

'Number of delegates must not exceed 1,500'

The MIC constitution states that the number of delegates should not exceed 1,500.

Furthermore, the applicants are also seeking another order to quash the ROS letter dated Feb 6, 2015, that the party membership as in 2012 can be used as the basis for election for all the posts.

Hence, they are also seeking court orders that the letters dated Dec 5 and Dec 31, 2014, and Feb 6, 2015, be declared null and void and that the ROS acted beyond its powers in issuing the directive, which they claimed is clearly against the Societies Act.

They further claimed, and sought a declaration, that the three letters issued by ROS are in conflict with Article 10 (1) of the Federal Constitution on the freedom of association.

Palanivel, Sothinathan, Pakas Rao and Balakrishnan are also seeking a declaration that whatever elections are held should be based on the party constitution, and the AGM held on Nov 30, 2013 is valid.

They further want an interim stay against the ROS to prevent any action being taken against the MIC.

The judicial review application was filed by the law firm Arbain & Co.