The Madras High Court has asked the Election Commission (EC) to explain why it did not respond to a complaint sent by former minister and DMK candidate Periyakaruppan regarding postal ballots that were allegedly sent to the wrong constituency.
The issue relates to the Assembly election in Sivaganga district’s Tiruppathur constituency, where Periyakaruppan polled 83,364 votes and rival candidate Seeni Vaasas Sethupathi polled 83,365. The EC declared Sethupathi the winner by a margin of one vote.
Periyakaruppan has moved the High Court seeking an interim bar on Sethupathi from taking part in the 17th Assembly proceedings. In his petition, he claimed that postal votes meant for the 58th Tiruppathur constituency were mistakenly sent to the 50th Tiruppathur constituency and sought directions to retrieve and add them to the correct count.
Senior counsel appearing for Periyakaruppan argued that the misrouted postal ballots were sent to Tiruppathur district’s Tiruppathur constituency and were rejected by the election officer there, though they should have been forwarded to Sivaganga district’s Tiruppathur constituency. The judges asked whether the EC had any procedure for such situations; the EC’s counsel submitted that the law does not specify what to do if postal votes are transferred to another constituency and that election records are preserved until an election petition is filed.
Observing that the EC has a duty to respond even if the matter concerns a single vote, the vacation bench directed the Commission to file a report stating the reasons for not replying to the complaint and adjourned the hearing to today.
