CHENNAI:The latest twist in the Nadigar Sangam election saga that’s ‘now showing’ is that the cinema union’s ‘perennial’ General Secretary Radha Ravi and company have to furnish particulars of the 3,000-odd actors who are eligible to vote in the upcoming election.
Acting on a petition filed by actors Vishal and Nasser, the dissidents to the Sarath Kumar-Radha Ravi axis, the Madras High Court on Monday directed the body to furnish the electoral list within two weeks.
In the petition, Vishal had charged Radha Ravi with trying to subvert the election from being fair for the second time in a row. “The list has not been handed over till date and without it we cannot verify the list of voters and canvass for elections. This was the same thing that happened in 2012, where not even the list of people nominated for the elections was published and the existing office bearers were hastily declared elected,” he contended in his petition.
It’s not just pride and power that the two factions are fighting over in the 63-year-old Sangam — that has seen the likes of MGR, Sivaji Ganesan, Vijayakant and several others shaping it’s place in history.
The major prize here is the 19-ground (just under two acres) property on Habibullah Road that belongs to the governing Trust — which is valued at Rs 200-300 crore at the very least. A failed attempt to lease the property to SPI Cinemas in 2011 was what set the ball rolling — and has ended up as an avalanche that is threatening their very functioning. Most of the dissidents want a marriage hall to be built there to keep generating revenue for the livelihood of aged actors and for other expenses.
The HC turned down the demand seeking a delay in the Nadigar Sangam elections from July 15, the original date, to the Sunday nearest to it. In their petition, the actors who are contesting against the powerhouse duo of Sarath Kumar and Radha Ravi said that members would find it easier to come and vote if the elections were held on a Sunday.
However, Justice Ravichandra Babu said that the election date could not be changed because such a provision did not exist in the framework of the Sangam’s rules.
