Setback for TVK as Madras HC restrains its one-vote winner MLA from participating in Assembly proceedings

The Madras High Court on Tuesday restrained Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) candidate R Seenivasa Sethupathi from participating in legislative proceedings in the Tamil Nadu Assembly after his election from Tiruppattur Assembly Constituency was challenged by Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader KR Periakaruppan [KR Periakaruppan v. Chief Election Officer]

With today's order, Sethupathi cannot participate in floor tests or other Assembly proceedings for now.

DMK's Periakaruppan had lost the election to Sethupathi by one vote. In an election petition, Periakaruppan alleged that a postal ballot was not counted as it was sent to the wrong constituency. He also alleged other irregularities and discrepancies in the counting process.

A Bench of Justices Victoria Gowri and Senthilkumar today held that a prima facie case has been made out.

Therefore, it restrained TVK's winning candidate, Sethupathi, from voting or otherwise taking part in any floor test, including a confidence motion, no-confidence motion, trust vote or any voting proceeding where the numerical strength of the House is tested, until further orders.

However, the Court clarified that the order would not be treated as setting aside Sethupathi’s election. It also said the order would not confer any right on Periakaruppan to be declared elected.

The order would mean that the TVK-led alliance has a wafer thin majority of one MLA in the 234-strong Tamil Nadu legislative assembly. The TVK alliance currently has 120 MLAs in the house. With today's order, only 119 can participate in the house proceedings.

In today's order, the Court also directed the official respondents to secure and preserve all records relating to the counting of votes in No.185 Tiruppattur Assembly Constituency, held on May 4, 2026.

These records include the consolidated counting abstract, statutory forms, round-wise counting sheets, EVM vote account records, postal ballot records, rejected postal ballot covers, rejected postal ballot papers, declarations, envelopes, proceedings relating to reverification of rejected postal ballots and all connected materials.

The Court also directed that if any postal ballot allegedly received in relation to No.185 Tiruppattur Assembly Constituency was received, handled, retained or rejected at No.50 Tiruppattur Assembly Constituency, the same must be identified, sealed, secured and preserved separately without opening or tampering with it.

It further ordered preservation of videographic footage relating to counting, postal ballots, scrutiny, rejection of postal ballots and reverification, if any, in its original electronic form, along with backup copies.

The respondents have been restrained from destroying, altering, transferring or parting with custody of such material except in accordance with law and subject to further orders of the Court or the competent election forum.

The Court clarified that its order should not be construed as a direction for recounting, reaccounting, reopening of ballot papers, validation of any rejected postal ballot or interference with the declaration of result already made.

It also left open the rights and contentions of all parties, including the availability of remedy under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Yesterday, the Court directed Election Commission of India (ECI) to file an affidavit explaining why it had not responded to the representation filed by DMK leader KR Periakaruppan over the postal ballot allegedly sent to the wrong Tiruppattur constituency.

In his plea, Periakaruppan had argued that the disputed postal ballot was intended for his Tiruppattur constituency but was mistakenly sent to another Tiruppattur constituency and was rejected there. He pointed out that he had addressed representations to the election officers which went unanswered.

ECI argued that it was only the record-keeper and administrator, not the forum to decide who should have won. It is submitted that once results were declared, the Returning Officer became functus officio and if a factual position has to be taken, the sealed postal ballots would have to be opened and re-verified through a trial-like process.

Periakaruppan had contested from No.185 Tiruppattur Assembly Constituency in Sivagangai district in the 17th Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly elections held on April 23, 2026.

After counting on May 4, TVK candidate Seenivasa Sethupathi was declared elected.

In his writ petition, Periakaruppan has alleged serious irregularities in the counting process.

He has claimed that there was an 18-vote discrepancy between the EVM vote figures recorded in the consolidated round-wise abstract and the figures published on the Election Commission of India website.

He has also alleged that one postal vote meant for No.185 Tiruppattur constituency was wrongly sent to No.50 Tiruppattur constituency in Tirupattur district.

According to him, the Returning Officer of No.50 Tiruppattur rejected the vote as invalid instead of forwarding it to the correct constituency.

Periakaruppan has sought a direction to election authorities to secure and account for the postal vote in No.185 Tiruppattur constituency.

He has also sought videograph footage of the mandatory reverification process of rejected postal ballots.

In an interim application, he has sought an injunction restraining Sethupathi from participating in any legislative process in the 17th Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly pending disposal of the writ petition.

The plea does not specifically seek a stay on oath-taking. It seeks a restraint on participation in legislative proceedings.