- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Madras High Court Refuses To...
Madras High Court Refuses To Entertain Writ Against Indirect Polls To Marakkanam Panchayat Union; Grants Liberty To File Election Petition
Sebin James
4 Dec 2021 5:35 AM GMT
The Madras High Court has refused to entertain a writ petition challenging the Marakkanam Panchayat Union indirect elections to the posts of Chairman and Vice Chairman.It has however granted liberty to the petitioner, S. Arjunan, who had contested for the post of Chairman in the Union, to prefer an election petition in this regard."A question of fact cannot be looked into by this court within...
The Madras High Court has refused to entertain a writ petition challenging the Marakkanam Panchayat Union indirect elections to the posts of Chairman and Vice Chairman.
It has however granted liberty to the petitioner, S. Arjunan, who had contested for the post of Chairman in the Union, to prefer an election petition in this regard.
"A question of fact cannot be looked into by this court within the four corners of our jurisdiction. We won't be able to look into the video evidence either as a question of fact. There are Supreme Court judgments on the limits of our jurisdiction," observed a Bench of Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice PD Audikesavalu.
Accordingly, the plea was dismissed as withdrawn.
Arjunan had alleged that the Tamil Nadu Minorities Welfare Minister Gingee K.S. Masthan had illegally interfered in the election process. Thus, an interim injunction was sought on the elected candidates from assuming the offices.
Senior Advocate ARL Sundaresan, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the Minister had interfered in the conduct of elections since its inception. Initially, a meeting of the ward members was held for election to the post of Chairman and Vice-Chairman. However, due to the pressure brought in by the said Minister, the elected members were prevented from participating and the election was postponed indefinitely, said the counsel.
He relied on the directions issued by the High Court to the State Election Commission in S.Kannan v. Tamilnadu State Election Commission & Ors., for ensuring the safety of elected members.
"The State Election Commission and the State police authorities will ensure that all rightful persons entitled to enter the hall whereat the elections are to be conducted get free and easy access thereto. Complete video coverage of the process of the elections and the circumstances prevailing immediately outside the election hall should be arranged and the same preserved for at least a period of 60 days after the date of conduct of the relevant elections and subject to further orders that may be passed by the appropriate forum", the High had ordered therein.
Senior Advocate argued that the petitioner had obtained more votes than the elected Chairman. However, when he asked for a recount of the votes polled for the Chairmanship, the Minister allegedly put pressure on the election official and his request was denied.
Similarly, another submission of the counsel was that the petitioner candidate was not allowed to vote for the Vice Chairmanship, the room was locked, and that the Vice-Chairman was elected unilaterally as if his candidature was not challenged by any others.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the High Court may appoint an officer to peruse the video footage of the elections so that what transpired during the said elections will be clear.
After hearing the counsel, the bench opined that this is a fit case for an election petition.
"Whether the Minister called the returning officer or not is a question of fact, videography must also be taken in evidence. If the disposal of election petition is delayed, in that case, the court can give a direction to expeditiously dispose off the matter," the court observed.
At this juncture, the Senior Counsel insisted that the writ be entertained as the limitations under Article 226 are self-imposed.
He requested the court to issue notice to the respondents and allow them to file a counter. He also drew the court's attention to an instance where a four-member commission of judges were appointed by the High Court during the Corporation Elections last year.
However, citing Article 243O(b) of the Constitution, the court reiterated that writ petitions on panchayat elections cannot be entertained except by way of an election petition.
Case Title: S.Arjunan v. The Tamil Nadu State Election Commission & Others.
Case No: WP/25629/2021 (Election)
Click Here To Read/ Download Order
