Postal ballot dispute: Madras HC restrains elected Tiruppattur MLA from floor test

Anand Kumar
By
Anand Kumar
Anand Kumar
Senior Journalist Editor
Anand Kumar is a Senior Journalist at Global India Broadcast News, covering national affairs, education, and digital media. He focuses on fact-based reporting and in-depth analysis...
- Senior Journalist Editor
3 Min Read
#image_title

The Madras High Court, by an interim order, on Tuesday restrained Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam (TVK) candidate Senivasa Sethupathi, who won from Tirupattur constituency in the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, from participating in the state legislative assembly, floor test and confidence motion on May 13.

A detailed order is awaited from the court. (file photo)
A detailed order is awaited from the court. (file photo)

A bench of Justices L Victoria Gowri and N Senthil Kumar placed an interim order restraining Sethupathi following a dispute over postal ballot from Tiruppattur Assembly constituency.

The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Monday told the court that the poll body had no jurisdiction to act on Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader KR Periyakarupappan’s complaint over the disputed postal ballot after the results were announced.

Periyakaruppan moved the Supreme Court last week alleging that election officials wrongly sent a postal ballot to another constituency in Tirupattur instead of Sivagangai district, leading to its rejection there.

Periyakaruppan lost by 83,374 votes, by just one vote.

He said that if the ballot was valid and counted in his favor, the election result would end in a tie.

Read also:Vijay finally crossed the majority mark as VCK, CPI(M) and CPI returned to TVK, paving the way for formation of Tamil Nadu government

Senior advocate G Rajagopalan representing ECI opposed the petition and told the court that Periyakarupappan had not provided any evidence to substantiate his claim. She also said that the Export Credit Union no longer had any role after the results were announced.

He said Periyakaruppan’s claim was based solely on the election agent’s report.

The ECI also opposed the suggestion that any error occurred with postal ballots. He described it as a “matter of evidence.”

However, the court in its order said there was a “prima facie case” for issuing interim directions restricting Sethupathi.

However, she clarified that Tuesday’s directions should not be mistaken when the court orders a recount of votes for the seat in question.

A detailed order is awaited from the court.

Share This Article
Anand Kumar
Senior Journalist Editor
Follow:
Anand Kumar is a Senior Journalist at Global India Broadcast News, covering national affairs, education, and digital media. He focuses on fact-based reporting and in-depth analysis of current events.
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *