JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Election Petition is filed under Sections 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 98(c), 100(d)(iii), 100(d)(iv), 101, 64 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, read with Rule 24 (2), 54-A, 63, 66-A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, read with 2 of the Rules of the Madras High Court- Election Petition, 1967, prays this Hon'ble Court to pass an order:-

(a). To Declare the election of the Returned Candidate namely Mr.I.S.Inbadurai, the 1st respondent herein from No.228, Radhapuram Assembly Constituency, Tamil Nadu, in the Election held on 16.05.2016, as void;

(b). For recounting of all postal ballots after re-verification, including the postal votes rejected as invalid;

(c). For recounting of the regular votes recorded in Electronic Voting Machines, covered under 19th, 20th and 21st rounds of counting;

(d). To declare that the Petitioner herein has been duly elected as a Member of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly in the Election held on 16.05.2016, from No.228, Radhapuram Assembly Constituency; and

(e). Award the costs of this petition.)

1. Heard Mr.A.E.Ravichandran, Learned Counsel for the Election Petitioner and Mr.T.V.Ramanujam, Learned Senior Counsel for the 1st respondent. For the respondents 2 to 14, there was no representation. Hence, called absent set ex parte. The Returning Officer, Radhapuram Constituency was initially arrayed as 15th respondent. Later struck off vide order dated 30.07.2019 of this Court passed in O.A.No.1185 of 2018.

2.This Election Petition is filed in respect of election held for Radhapuram Assembly Constituency, Tamil Nadu, on 16.05.2016. The Petition is filed under sections 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 98(c), 100(d)(iii), 100(d)(iv), 101, 64 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, read with Rule 24 (2), 54-A, 63, 66-A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, read with 2 of the Rules of the Madras High Court Election Petition, 1967, by Mr.M.Appavu, the candidate who lost the election by margin of 49 votes to the 1st respondent.

3. In nutshell, the election of the Returned candidate is challenged on the following grounds:-

(i). As per Rule 54-A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, the Returning Officer of the Constituency should count the postal ballot papers first. In this case, the Returning Officer commenced counting of postal ballots on 19.05.2016 at 8.00 am, but unilaterally deferred counting the votes received through post, on receiving objections from either side. Resumed the counting of postal ballots at 3.00 p.m, after completion of counting the Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) votes.

(ii). More than 200 postal votes were declared invalid without assigning reasons. The request to reverify the postal ballots after clarifying the ground on which the postal ballot papers were rejected not heeded by the Returning Officer and the Election Observer.

(iii). The attitude of the Returning Officer and the Observer changed, after knowing the news about the overall leading of the party to which the 1st respondent belong. They not only refused to recount the postal ballots rejected as invalid, they added 200 inadmissible and invalid votes in favour of the 1st respondent against the objections raised.

(iv). The petitioner and his Chief Agent Mr.Adhi Paramasivam, sat in Dharna peacefully inside the counting hall protesting against the unfair practice and procedure adopted by the Returning Officers. Through Para Military Force, the Petitioner and his Chief Agent were forcibly removed from the counting hall.

(v). Till 18th round, the petitioner was leading by a margin of 1,321 votes. Taking advantage of the situation, the 19th, 20th and 21st rounds of the EVM counting was done in haste and improperly. The results for these three rounds were announced simultaneously, after manipulating the votes in favour of the 1st respondent. In the absence of the petitioner and his agent votes were inflated in f