HC restrains EC from notifying bye-elections for five Assembly segments in TN

Chennai, Jul 10 (PTI) The Madras High Court on Friday restrained the EC till July 31 from notifying bye-polls to the five constituencies in Tamil Nadu where the winning candidates resigned soon after getting elected in the Assembly polls held on April 23 this year. The five segments includes Chief Minister C Joseph Vijay's Tiruchirappalli (East) Assembly constituency. The First Bench comprising Chief Justice S A Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arulmurugan passed the interim order and posted to July 31, further hearing of a Public Interest Litigation filed by advocate K Venkatachalapathy. The bench directed Vijay and others to file their comprehensive counter-affidavits with all factual and legal assertions within three weeks. M R Vijayabaskar (Karur), C Vijayabaskar (Viralimalai), S Jayakumar (Perundurai), and Esaki Subbaiya who resigned his Ambasamudram Assembly seat were the others. In his petition, the petitioner sought to declare that the vacancies arising out of the resignations of various candidates (in the 2026 general elections to the TN Assembly) do not constitute "clear vacancies" or available vacancies for the purpose of holding bye-elections under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Citing three judgments of the Supreme Court, the bench said the top court had held that the occurrence of a casual vacancy under the RP Act, triggered by the acceptance of a member's resignation, does not automatically render that seat a "clear or available vacancy." The bench underlined several aspects. Prima facie, the observations of the Supreme Court indicate that if an election petition seeks the composite relief of declaring the petitioner as duly elected under the RP Act, the vacancy cannot be treated as a "clear vacancy" available for a bye-election. The bench said that in matters touching upon the purity of the democratic process, a narrow and pedantic interpretation of locus standi cannot be applied. The submission advanced by the counsel for the contesting respondents that the petitioner does not have the locus standi as he is not an elector in those specific constituencies fails to pass muster. The bench said that however, the nuanced arguments concerning the date of vacancy vis-a-vis the date of filing the election petition, alongside the maintainability of the election petitions highlighted by the EC, require a deeper examination. PTI COR VGN SA