The Kuala Lumpur High Court (Appellate and Special Powers Division) today set May 12 to decide whether MIC vice-president M Saravanan and another MIC leader can be intervenors in the judicial review challenging the decision of the Registrar of Societies (ROS) ordering the party to hold fresh elections.

Justice Asmabi Mohamad set the date in chambers in the presence of senior federal counsel Amarjeet Singh and all those who filed for the judicial review.

Speaking to reporters later, Amarjeet said the court, on the same date, will also hear the arguments of both sides on the application for a postponement until after the judicial review has been disposed of.

    

Besides Saravanan ( left ), the other MIC leaders who filed the application to be intervenor in the judicial review was the party's central working committee (CWC) member S Ananthan.

Two applications for leave for a judicial review were filed separately last February.

The first application was filed on Feb 23 by an MIC CWC member A K Ramalingam, 47, who named ROS and its director-general, Mohammad Razin Abdullah, as the respondents.

Ramalingam had applied to nullify the respondents' order via letters dated Dec 5, 2014, and Feb 6, 2015 and to seek a declaration that the order was mala fide and ultra vires .  

Declaration sought

The second application was filed on Feb 24 by MIC president G Palanivel, MIC vice-presidents S Sothinathan and S Balakrishnan and former MIC secretary-general A Prakash Rao, naming the ROS and the minister of home affairs as the first and second respondents, respectively.

In their application, Palanivel ( right ), Sothinathan, Balakrishnan and Prakash Rao are seeking, among other things, a declaration that matters associated with the party elections were subject to the party constitution and could not be based on the ROS' views.

They are also seeking a declaration that the outcome of the MIC annual general assembly held on Nov 30, 2013, was valid and enforceable.

The four leaders are also seeking an injunction to prevent the two respondents from taking any action or issuing any directive against the MIC until the judicial review has been disposed of.

- Bernama