High Court of Judicature at Madras
M. VENUGOPAL, J.
S. Ramachandran
Versus
E.V. Velu & Others
Election Petition No. 2 of 2011
Decided on: 25-09-2014
1. The Petitioner has preferred the present Election Petition before this Court seeking for a declaration that the election of the Returned Candidate, viz., E.V.Velu, the 1st Respondent herein from No.63, Tiruvannamalai Assembly Constituency, Tamil Nadu, in the Election held on 13.04.2011 (in which results were declared on 13.05.2011) as void. Also, he has sought for the relief for passing of an order by this Court in ordering Re-poll for the whole of No.63, Tiruvannamalai Assembly Constituency or inter alia order re-poll in Polling Station Nos.17, 20, 39, 41, 57, 61, 62, 69, 75, 88, 93, 98, 99, 104, 112, 135, 159, 166-A, 182, 187, 191, 204, 209, 215, 222 and 224. Moreover, he has also prayed for the relief of declaration to the effect that he was duly elected from No.63, Tiruvannamalai Assembly Constituency in the Election held on 13.04.2011 (in which results were declared on 13.05.2011 and to direct the 1st Respondent to pay costs.
2. The Long and Germane Facts of the Election Petition:
2.1. According to the Petitioner, the Election Commission of India decided to hold General Elections to the Tamil Nadu Assembly 2011 and issued the necessary Notifications and Election Schedule. Further, the filing of Nomination commenced on 16.03.2011. The last date for nomination was 26.03.2011. The date of Election was fixed to 13.04.2011. As a matter of fact, Election to No.63, Tiruvannamalai Assembly Constituency in Tamil Nadu State, which is the subject matter of the present Election Petition was scheduled to be held within the time table mentioned aforesaid. After scrutiny and withdrawals, the nomination papers of the Petitioner and the Respondents were accepted by the Returning Officer, V.Boopathy, who was presently the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruvannamalai. During the Election, M.Rajendran, I.A.S., was the District Collector, Tiruvannamalai and the District Election Officer, under whom the Returning Officer worked. The Petitioner contested as the Official Candidate of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (A.I.A.D.M.K.) in 'Two Leaves' Symbol and the 1st Respondent, whose election was under challenge in the present petition, contested as the Official Candidate of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (D.M.K.) in 'Rising Sun' Symbol. The Petitioner appointed K.R. Balasubramanian, as his Chief Counting Agent, who was issued the Identification Card.
2.2. The 1st Respondent was the sitting Member of the Assembly from Thandrampattu Constituency and he was the Minister for Food in the previous D.M.K. Government at the time of the Election. The Returning Officer declared that the 1st Respondent secured 84,802 votes as against 79,676 votes said to have been secured by the Petitioner and resultantly, declared the 1st Respondent having been duly elected by a margin of 5126 votes. The 1st Respondent managed to secure this victory by corrupt practices and by brining upon undue influence on the District Election Officer and the Returning Officer in his capacity as the State Cabinet Minister. The District Election Officer and the Returning Officer made ready a well designed ground for ensuring the victory of the First Respondent by manipulating the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).
2.3. It is the case of the Petitioner that there were totally 236 Polling Stations in No.63, Tiruvannamalai Assembly Constituency. Each Polling Station was headed by an Officer called the Presiding Officer under whom there were other staff to assist him. Each contesting candidate was permitted to have one Agent in each Station called “Polling Agent”. After mock poll and before commencement of the actual Poll, the Presiding Officer should affix the paper seal on the Control Unit of the Electronic Voting Machine to ensure that the Control Unit was not tampered with, as that would contain the votes obtained by each candidate. At the close of Poll, the Presiding Officer should fill the total votes polled in the Polling Station in Form 17 - C Part I and also note t
V.S. Achuthanandan v. P.J. Francis and another [(2001) 3 SCC 81]
Surendra Singh Vs. Hardayal Singh [AIR 1985 SC 89]
Harcharan Singh Vs. Sajjan Singh [AIR 1985 SC 236]
Harsh Kumar V. Bhagwan Sahari Rawat and others, (2003) 7 SCC 709, at page 710
R. Narayanan v. S. Semmalai and others [(1980) 2 SCC 537]
P.K.K. Shamsudeen v. K.A.M. Mappillai Mohindeen and others [AIR 1989 SC 640]
Ram Sewak Yadav v. Hussain Kamil Kidwai & Ors.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.