|
The ongoing tension within The Tamil Nadu Chemists and Druggists Association (TNCDA) recently escalated into an open exchange of letters, highlighting a fundamental disagreement over governance and procedural authority.
This prominent association, which operates from its Egmore office, found its two highest-ranking office bearers presenting contrasting interpretations of the organizational bylaws regarding the convening of a crucial meeting. The members watched closely as president, S.A. Ramesh, and the general secretary, K.K. Selvan offered their distinct viewpoints.
The initial action came from secretary Selvan, who announced a Special General Body Meeting (SGBM) scheduled for November 1 in Bhavani, a move that the president’s camp immediately branded as completely baseless and procedurally invalid. This direct challenge, which aimed to delegitimize the secretary’s authority to convene such a crucial event, became the focal point of Selvan’s subsequent communication. The secretary, operating out of Salem, stood firm on the necessity and legality of the convening process, aiming to decisively refute the claims challenging the integrity of his decision.
In defense of his action, secretary Selvan formally asserted that the SGBM announcement was entirely in line with the association's established protocols, specifically invoking Bylaw 14.3. Furthermore, he emphasized that the notice strictly complied with the legal requirements of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, referencing specific sections including Rules 28(1), 28(2), 25, and 27 to underline the announcement’s legal legitimacy.
Beyond the formal rulebook, Selvan stressed that the call for the meeting was not unilateral but was triggered by significant support from the membership base. He clarified that the decision was made only after receiving explicit written and email requests that carried the necessary signatures of a recognized majority of the district association executive committee members, thereby establishing a mandate of support.
The counter-narrative was primarily derived from the president’s camp, whose concerns focused less on the administrative details of the SGBM announcement and more on the integrity of the participating members and the adherence to long-standing recognition standards. The letter issued under the guidance of president Ramesh questioned the very basis of the membership status being used to legitimize the Special General Body Meeting and challenged the secretary’s reliance on the current signatories.
The president’s argument centered on the requirement that only associations recognized since the year 2018 were to be considered the official, affiliated bodies of the state association. These groups, president Ramesh maintained, were the ones fulfilling their organizational duties by submitting the required subscriptions and duly electing and sending their authorized executive committee members for state-level recognition, ensuring both fees compliance and a verifiable mandate.
Thus, the core conflict remains a balanced issue of dual mandates, secretary Selvan champions the will of the active, signatory majority of executive members and the compliance with specific statutory rules, while president Ramesh upholds the importance of adhering to the historical recognition date, fees compliance, and established membership hierarchy. Both leaders appear committed to the welfare of the TNCDA, but through starkly different views on the necessity of action and organizational order.
|