SC to hear TVK MLA’s plea against Madras HC order
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea of a TVK lawmaker challenging the Madras High Court’s order restraining him from participating in floor test in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly. Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) leader C Joseph Vijay on May 10 took oath as the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.
The plea of TVK MLA R Seenivasa Sethupathi, assailing the High Court order, was mentioned for urgent listing and hearing on Monday before a bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant by senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi. The bench agreed to list the case for hearing on Wednesday.
Sethupathi had won the No.185 Tiruppattur assembly constituency in Sivagangai district by a margin of a single vote against Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader and former minister KR Periakaruppan.
Periakaruppan subsequently approached the Madras High Court alleging irregularities in the counting process, including the alleged rejection of a postal ballot that was mistakenly sent to another constituency.
In an interim order, the High Court restrained Sethupathi from voting or otherwise participating in any floor test, confidence motion, no-confidence motion, trust vote or any proceeding where the numerical strength of the House is tested, pending further orders.
The order has significant implications for the ruling TVK-led alliance in the 234-member Tamil Nadu Assembly. The alliance currently commands the support of 120 MLAs. With Sethupathi barred from participating in voting proceedings, its effective strength in the House would be reduced to 119, leaving it with a slender majority of one member.
Before the High Court, Periakaruppan alleged that one postal ballot meant for No.185 Tiruppattur constituency was wrongly sent to No.50 Tiruppattur assembly constituency in Tirupattur district.
According to him, the ballot was rejected there instead of being forwarded to the correct returning officer for consideration.
He also pointed to alleged discrepancies in the electronic voting machine (EVM) count, claiming that there was an 18-vote variation between the consolidated counting abstract and figures published on the Election Commission website.
While passing the interim order, the High Court observed that a strong prima facie case had been made out for a limited protective direction.
However, it clarified that the order did not amount to setting aside Sethupathi’s election, nor did it confer any right on Periakaruppan to be declared elected.
The High Court further directed authorities to secure and preserve all records related to the counting process in the No.185 Tiruppattur assembly constituency, including video footage concerning counting, scrutiny, rejection of postal ballots and reverification proceedings, in their original electronic form along with backup copies.
