Poonam Dhillon Breaks Silence On CINTAA Crisis Says Committee Is Entirely Legal

The ongoing dispute within the Cine and TV Artistes Association CINTAA has taken another turn, with president Poonam Dhillon addressing the allegations surrounding the associations functioning, the demand for fresh elections and the recent resignations within its Executive Committee. Speaking at a press conference, Poonam presented her side of the story and strongly rejected claims that the current CINTAA committee is illegal.

“We have been compelled to call this press conference today because, for the past week, we have observed strange rumors being spread about CINTAA—specifically, claims that the current CINTAA committee is illegal,” Poonam said. “First and foremost, I want to clarify and confirm that this committee is entirely legal.” She also explained that several senior members were unable to attend the press conference because of professional commitments. Poonam said Rakesh Bedi was in Australia, while Paintal and Yashpal Sharma were shooting, but maintained that the senior artistes continued to support the team.

Calling the recent developments “very unfortunate,” Poonam said the association had been subjected to rumours and statements that, in her view, had damaged its reputation. “We deeply regret that the General Secretary of the previous committee tarnished CINTAA’s reputation and brought disrepute to the organization,” she said. According to Poonam, the leadership initially chose not to respond publicly, but eventually felt compelled to present what she described as the accurate version of events.

A major part of Poonams explanation focused on the longstanding relationship between CINTAA and CAWT. She explained that CINTAA was established in 1958, while CAWT was formed in 1991 as a trust intended to help artistes and their families. Poonam recalled that the trust was created by several veteran actors, including Dilip Kumar, Sunil Dutt, Amrish Puri, Amjad Khan, Asha Parekh and Chandrashekhar, with the aim of providing financial and medical assistance to artistes in need and supporting families of artistes who had passed away.

The discussion eventually turned to the construction of the CINTAA Tower. Poonam said senior actors including Mithun Chakraborty and Johnny Lever were involved with the project, but when funds became insufficient, CINTAA was approached for financial assistance. According to her, CINTAA provided several crores of rupees, which was a substantial amount at the time.

Poonam stressed that the money was provided interest free and that the decision had been approved by CINTAA members at an AGM. However, she said there was no formal written agreement between the organisations. Over the years, the absence of an MoU became a recurring issue, with successive committees attempting to formalise the arrangement but failing to complete it.

“For ten years, this MoU never materialized,” Poonam said. She explained that the purpose of the agreement was not merely financial but also to establish clear guidelines for future committees, particularly because CINTAA elections take place every three years and new office bearers need a formal framework to follow.

According to Poonam, the matter was raised again during the last AGM on May 1. A deadline of August 15 was eventually set for the MoU to be completed. She said the proposed agreement also included commitments to assist needy CINTAA members and provide CINTAA with permanent, rent free office space in the CINTAA Tower.

Poonam further explained that CINTAA had already suffered financially because funds had been taken out of fixed deposits to provide the earlier assistance. “It wasn't as if the money was just lying around—it came from liquidated investments,” she said, pointing out that the organisation had also lost interest that could otherwise have been earned on those investments.

With the August 15 deadline approaching, Poonam said she sent a message to the Executive Committee on August 3 calling for an emergency meeting. Her intention, she explained, was to ensure that every member reviewed and approved the draft MoU before it was sent forward.

“We insisted that the MoU could not be signed until every single member had seen and approved it,” she said. An emergency meeting was proposed for August 4, but Poonam claimed that General Secretary Upasana Singh informed her that she was unable to attend because of other commitments.

Poonam said she requested Singh to join the meeting through Zoom if she could not attend in person, stressing that the matter was time sensitive. According to Poonam, she was concerned that any delay could later be attributed to CINTAA and could affect the signing of the agreement.

The dispute then moved towards the question of a fresh election. Poonam said a meeting was held without the MoU and EGM being included in the agenda, which she considered a serious issue. She argued that the agenda of an Executive Committee meeting should be prepared by the General Secretary in consultation with the president.

Poonam also questioned the very basis for calling a re-election. “There is no provision for a ‘re-election’ in our constitution,” she said. She pointed out that the existing committee had been elected on May 1, 2024, and argued that the next election was not due until May 1, 2027.

According to Poonam, the justification given for a re-election was that there had been too many disagreements and arguments within the Executive Committee. She rejected that reasoning, saying disagreements are a natural part of any decision making body.

“When an executive committee discusses matters, disagreements are bound to happen,” Poonam said. She compared the situation to Parliament, where different opinions and debates are part of the process. “That is the very purpose of an executive committee meeting: to hear everyone's point of view and then make a decision through voting,” she added.

Poonam also questioned how a new election could be conducted if the existing committee had neither been dissolved nor resigned. She said the office had specifically asked whether the committee had been dissolved and whether the members were resigning, and the answer in both cases was no.

“So, how would a re-election take place?” she questioned. “If you aren't resigning and the committee isn't being dissolved, how do you propose to hold a re-election?”

Another major point raised by Poonam concerned the involvement of the Federation of Western India Cine Employees, or FWICE, in the proposed election. She said she was surprised when it was suggested that FWICE would conduct the CINTAA election.

“We don't have that kind of connection with them,” Poonam said, questioning why another organisation should be responsible for conducting CINTAAs internal election. She also argued that CINTAA has historically conducted its own elections and questioned the authority of FWICE to interfere in the associations internal affairs.

Poonam said she was also surprised to learn that an election council had allegedly already been discussed and that names had been considered. According to her, this gave the impression that preparations for a change in leadership had been underway for some time.

The CINTAA president also recalled that rumours about attempts to remove the existing committee had been circulating for a while, but she said the leadership did not initially take them seriously. “We never took it seriously—we thought, ‘There are only seven or eight months left,’” she said.

Poonam claimed that several senior members, including herself, Padmini Kolhapure, Paintal and Rakesh Bedi, requested that the members wait until August 15 before moving ahead with any election-related decision. She stressed that the meeting was taking place around August 5, meaning there were only around ten days left before the MoU deadline.

“It wasn't as if there was such an emergency that the election had to be held immediately,” Poonam said. She maintained that the MoU was the main issue that needed to be resolved and that the organisation could have addressed the election question afterward.

“I even went so far as to say that if they felt a re-election was necessary, we would join them in calling for it after August 15th,” she said. Poonam said her appeal was ultimately about giving the association enough time to resolve an issue that had remained pending for years.

However, according to her account, the opposing members remained firm on their demand and the meeting ended without resolving the MoU or the proposed EGM. Poonam said the situation left the leadership with no choice but to publicly explain its position.

“Unless the accurate version reaches you, people might believe their claims to be true,” she said.

The CINTAA dispute now revolves around several key questions, including the status of the existing committee, the validity of the demand for fresh elections, the proposed EGM, the MoU with CAWT and the question of whether an outside organisation should oversee CINTAAs election process.

For Poonam Dhillon, however, the central issue remains the need to protect the organisations functioning and ensure that decisions are made according to its constitution. Her press conference was an attempt to put her version of the events on record while firmly rejecting the claim that the present committee is illegal.

As the disagreement continues, the coming weeks could prove crucial for CINTAA and its members. Whether the dispute is resolved through internal discussions, an EGM or an eventual election remains to be seen, but Poonams message was clear: she believes the existing committee remains legitimate and that the organisation should first address the issues that have been pending for years before rushing into another election.