Kuala Lumpur – The decision by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on the Judicial Review application filed by former MIC Strategic Director A.K.Ramalingam has created some confusion due to contradicting press reports and statements.
The confusion was whether the matter was withdrawn by Ramalingam’s lawyers (in which case it could be filed again by the party concerned) or whether it was dismissed by the court (in which case the plaintiff can only appeal but cannot re-file as a fresh application).
The application was filed by Ramalingam (pic) on July 30, seeking leave of the court for Judicial Review on the decision by the Registrar of Societies (RoS) declaring Dato Seri Dr S.Subramaniam as the Acting President of MIC and endorsing the 2009 CWC decision which declared that Palanivel ceased to be a member of MIC as per article 91 of the MIC Constitution. The said decisions were contained in RoS letter dated 25 June 2015.
When the matter came up for hearing yesterday before Justice Datin Azizah Nawawi, Senior Federal Counsel Amarjeet Singh who appeared for RoS, argued that the said RoS letter did not mention Ramalingam’s name and therefore this action should be struck out.
“He is in substance a stranger or a ‘busybody’ to the contents of the letter,” argued Amarjeet, as reported in Star online yesterday.
Selvam Shanmugam who appeared for Ramalingam then withdrew the application and the court struck out the matter with RM10,000 costs to be paid by Applicant.
The matter was heard in chambers.
However, later in the evening Ramalingam issued a press statement circulated through social media explaining about the decision of the High Court.
Selvam Shanmugam clarifies
Selliyal.com today contacted Selvam Shanmugam, the lawyer who appeared for A.K.Ramalingam in the judicial review application yesterday and the lawyer confirmed that he withdrew the matter upon hearing arguments from the Federal Counsel Amarjeet Singh.
“The court then struck out the matter with RM10,000 costs to be paid to the consolidated fund” Selvam further clarified to selliyal.com.
“This means that my client Ramalingam is at liberty to file the matter again if he chooses to do so” Selvam said.
Bernama, in its report yesterday also quoted Selvam as saying , “Ramalingam might file a fresh application after obtaining a letter from the RoS on the status of his membership”.
-R.Mutharasan
