Madras High Court clears decks for elections to Tamil Film Producers Council

The Madras High Court has cleared the decks for the conduct of elections to Tamil Film Producers Council (TFPC) on February 22, 2026 by dismissing an application filed jointly by four of its members who had urged the court to grant an interim injunction against the polls.

Justice P. Dhanabal also refused to interfere with the decision of the council which had appointed S. Rajeswaran, a retired judge of the High Court, as an election officer and dismissed another application filed for appointment of some other retired judge to conduct the polls.

The judge agreed with TFPC counsel Krishna Ravindran that the four applicants G. Srinivasan, I. John Max, P. Ranjith Kumar and A.K. Michael, who had already submitted applications for the post of executive member, had not made out a prima facie case for grant of injunction.

He also concurred with the submissions of the counsel that neither the balance of convenience was in favour of the four applicants nor had they proven any irreparable loss that could be caused to them if a pre-trial interim injunction was not granted in their favour before hearing their suit.

Justice Dhanabal further pointed out the applicants had not levelled any allegation against Mr. Rajeswaran but for pointing out that he had served as an election officer during the last elections too. Therefore, it was unnecessary to disturb the process midway and appoint another officer, he said.

The judge also took note that the general body of the association had decided to appoint Mr. Rajeswaran as an election officer for 2026-29. All four applicants before the High Court had participated in the general body meeting but had not raised any objection over there for such appointment.

After the appointment and the announcement of the election scheduled by the election officer, the litigants had submitted nominations before the same election officer expressing their desire to contest for the post of executive committee member and then filed a suit against the election process, the judge added.

“Therefore, once the applicants had filed nominations, accepting the appointment of the Election Officer, later they cannot deny the same, without any valid grounds. There are no grounds urged by the applicants to allow these applications,” Justice Dhanabal observed while dismissing both of them.

He also wrote: “As the election process has started, voters’ list has been finalised and the date of election is also fixed, it is not appropriate to appoint another Election Officer at this stage. The applicants are not entitled to any relief through these applications and therefore, these applications have no merits and deserve to be dismissed.”