Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) founder S. Ramadoss’ estranged son Anbumani Ramadoss on Monday (February 2, 2026) claimed before the Madras High Court that only he represents the political party legally and that the group rallying behind his father was only a breakaway faction, which could not be considered as the party.
Appearing before the first Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan, senior counsel N.L. Rajah, representing Dr. Anbumani, said, his father was trying to “snatch an order from the court behind his (Dr. Anbumani) back” without making his client a party to the case.
The submissions were made during the hearing of a writ petition filed by the party founder seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) in Tamil Nadu to communicate the allotment of the ‘mango’ symbol to the party for this year’s Assembly election to his official address in Chennai.
Since the founder had made only the ECI and the CEO as respondents to the writ petition, the Chief Justice’s Bench refused to hear the submissions made by the senior counsel representing Dr. Anbumani. “Mr. Rajah, how can we give you audience when you are not a party here?” the Chief Justice asked.
“Exactly that is what I am saying MiLord, that an order is being attempted to be snatched behind my back. I am the party, they are a breakaway faction. What I am saying is that this writ petition [filed in the name of the PMK, represented by its founder] is not maintainable at all without my presence,” the senior counsel replied.
However, the Chief Justice said: “We do not know. You are alien to these proceedings. We can’t hear you now. If you want to become a party to these proceedings, move an application.” After Mr. Rajah agreed to file an application, the judges ordered notices, returnable within three weeks, to the ECI and CEO in the writ petition.
What is the case about?
The writ petition had been filed in the name of the PMK, represented by its founder Dr. Ramadoss, who also claimed to be the incumbent president of the party and accused his son of having submitted forged documents before the ECI in order to claim that he continued to be the president of the party.
The petitioner urged the High Court to quash a communication sent by the ECI on July 30, 2025, regarding the allotment of the ‘mango’ symbol, to his son Dr. Anbumani’s address in Chennai and issue a consequent direction to the Commission to issue a fresh communication to the party founder’s address in Chennai.
In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the founder stated that his son’s three tenures as party president ended on May 28, 2025. He accused his son of having played a “fraud” on the ECI by submitting forged documents to claim as though he continued to be the party president.
The petitioner said, his son could not make such claims on the basis of illegal party meetings conducted without the authorisation of the founder.
Further, claiming he was the incumbent president of the party, the petitioner said, the ECI had taken a decision on July 31, 2025, to allot the ‘mango’ symbol to the PMK in the Legislative Assembly elections held in Bihar last year and also for the Assembly elections due in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry this year.
However, that communication had been wrongly sent to Dr. Anbumani’s Tilak Street address at T. Nagar in Chennai though it ought to have been sent to the party founder and incumbent president’s address at Nattu Muthu Naiken Street in T. Nagar, the petitioner claimed.
Dr. Ramadoss also said, the Delhi High Court had recently dealt with a case regarding the factional dispute in the party between himself and his son. During the hearing of the case on December 14, 2025, the ECI counsel had submitted that the commission would freeze the ‘mango’ symbol during the 2026 elections.
“As such, till date, the Election Commission of India has not sent fresh communication to the present president Dr. S. Ramadoss to his office address or did not choose to freeze the symbol ‘mango’ as the dispute is made by a rival claim by former president who has been removed from the membership of the party on September 11, 2025,” the writ petitioner’s affidavit read.
