SC stays Madras HC order barring TVK MLA from Tamil Nadu Assembly proceedings

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (May 13) issued a stay on the Madras High Court order, which barred TVK MLA R Seenivasa Sethupathi from taking part in any floor test or trust vote in the Tamil Nadu Assembly. The C Joseph Vijay-led TVK government won the vote of confidence during the day.

Top court steps in

The stay order was issued by a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi, who termed the Madras High Court order as "atrocious" as the same came to be passed in a petition filed under Article 226 by Sethupathi's opposing candidate, and not an election petition as required under law.

Also Read: Barred by Madras HC from Assembly voting, TVK MLA moves SC

"This is atrocious to say the least," stated the Supreme Court.

"We have heard the senior counsels for the parties. Counsel for the respondent is granted two weeks. In the meantime, the order shall remain stayed. Further proceedings before the High Court also stayed," it added, as quoted by the Bar and Bench.

One-vote victory challenged

The top court was hearing an appeal moved by R Seenivasa Sethupathi against the interim order passed by the Madras High Court restraining him from participating in proceedings of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly.

Also Read: TVK supporters rally outside Vijay house amid govt fomation talks

Sethupathi had secured victory in the recently concluded Assembly election from No.185 Tiruppattur constituency in Sivagangai district by a margin of a single vote over his nearest rival, DMK’s KR Periakaruppan.

Questioning the result, Periakaruppan approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, alleging irregularities during the counting process.

Among the grievances raised was the handling of a postal ballot, which, according to him, was meant for No.185 Tiruppattur Assembly Constituency but was mistakenly sent to No.50 Tiruppattur Assembly Constituency in Tirupattur district.

He contended that instead of rejecting the ballot, authorities ought to have forwarded it to the correct Returning Officer.

Counting dispute deepens

Periakaruppan also pointed to alleged discrepancies in the electronic voting data, claiming an 18-vote discrepancy between the consolidated counting abstract and the figures on the official website of the Election Commission.

Also Read: Who are the nine ministers sworn in with Vijay as Tamil Nadu CM?

Acting on the plea, the High Court on Tuesday restrained Sethupathi from voting or taking part in any floor test, confidence motion, no-confidence motion, trust vote or other proceedings where the strength of the House could be tested.

At the same time, it clarified that the interim protection would neither amount to setting aside Sethupathi’s election nor create any right in favour of Periakaruppan.

When the appeal came up before the top court, the Bench questioned the maintainability of the writ petition itself.

Bench questions maintainability

"How do you file a 226 petition? Is ECI supporting the petitioner or respondent?" the Court asked.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Sethupathi, submitted that the Election Commission supported his client.

Also Read: Tamil anthem row: Aadhav Arjuna offers explanation, says TVK govt will follow old practice

"High Court says (only) election petition is maintainable and yet passes a stay order," the Supreme Court observed with disapproval.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Periakaruppan, then addressed the Bench on the factual matrix.

"Please allow me to state the facts. This is constituency 185; there is a constituency of the same name. It transpired that one postal ballot reached constituency 50. Had it come to the correct postal address, there would have been a tie. In the counter, ECI says there is no provision! Section 100 provides counting with regard to votes before the officer," Rohatgi said.

After hearing the parties briefly, the Court proceeded to stay the operation of the High Court order.