Disposed

K.K.Ramesh, S/O Kuppusamy Iyer v. the Governmnet of India, Rep.

Madras HC26 Nov 2018WP(MD)/22801/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court petitioned by K.K. Ramesh sought a direction to conduct bye-elections in Thirupparankundram and Thiruvarur constituencies. Noting the Election Commission's office note and the pendency of related litigation, the court disposed of the petition without issuing a mandatory direction for the Thirupparankundram election.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petition disposed of without direction to conduct bye-election in Thirupparankundram.

K.K.Ramesh, S/O Kuppusamy Iyer Vs the Governmnet of India, Rep. — Election Law | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 26.11.2018

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

W.P(MD)No.22801 of 2018

¶7

K.K.Ramesh ... Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

The Government of India, Rep. By its Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Chief Election Commissioner, Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan Ashoka Road New Delhi – 110 001. 3. The Chief Election Officer (CEO) Tamilnadu Fort St. George, Secretariat Chennai – 600 009. ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to conduct the bye election in 195 Thiruparangundram and 168 Thiruvarur constituency in Tamilnadu by considering the petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2018.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Ramesh Petitioner in Person For Respondents : Mr.I.Sekar for R1 Mr.Niranjan Rajagopal for M/s.G.R.Associates for R2 & R3

¶12

O R D E R https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.)

¶13

The petitioner filed this writ petition in probono publico to

¶14

¶15

direct the Election Commission of India to conduct the bye-election to elect the representatives in respect of 195 Thirupparankundram and 168 Thiruvarur constituencies in the State of Tamil Nadu.

¶16

2.The petitioner in his affidavit filed in support of the petition contended that not withstanding the vacancies that arose in those two constituencies on account of the death of the then members of the Legislative Assembly, follow up action was not taken by the Election Commission of India to conduct the bye-election.

¶17

3.Since the petitioner produced documents indicating that the bye-elections to the Constituencies in other States were conducted within the statutory period, we have issued notice to the Election Commission of India, solely, for the purpose of filing an affidavit before this Court with regard to the action taken for conducting the election.

¶18

The Chief Electoral Officer, Tamil Nadu, filed an affidavit taking into account the contention taken by the petitioner. In Paragraph No.4 of the affidavit, the Chief Election Officer submitted that the vacancy in 168-Thiruvarur Assembly Constituency arose on 07.08.2018 and the Commission is taking steps to conduct the election by February 2019, which is the statutory period. The said statement is taken on record.

¶19

With regard to 195-Thirupparankundram Assembly Constituency, there is an election petition bearing No.2/2017, which is pending before the Principal Bench of this Court. According to the Chief Election Officer, in the said election petition, the elected petitioner has filed an application to declare him as elected and the High Court heard the matter and judgment was reserved. According to the Chief Election Officer, in view of the pendency of the original application in O.A.No.955 of 2018, it would not be possible to conduct the election for the Thirupparankundram Constituency.

¶20

Since the Election Commission has already taken action for conducting bye-election to 168- Thiruvarur Assembly Constituency, there is no need for a further adjudication of the issue raised by the petitioner in respect of the said constituency. Insofar as the bye-election to 195- Thirupparankundram Assembly Constituency, the Election Commission made it clear that they would wait till a decision is taken by the High Court in O.A.No.955 of 2018.

¶21

In view of the said position, we are of the view that no direction need be issued to the Election Commission to conduct the bye-election in respect of 195-Thirupparankundram Assembly Constituency. The Election Commission has to take a decision for conducting the bye-election taking into account the judgment in O.A.No.955 of 2018.

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

¶24

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs.

¶25

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-I)

¶26

/True Copy/

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar (CS-IV)

¶28

To
1.	The Home Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi.
2.	The Chief Election Commissioner, Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan Ashoka Road New Delhi – 110 001.
3.	The Chief Election Officer (CEO) Tamilnadu Fort St. George, Secretariat Chennai – 600 009.
+ 1 + 1	CC TO Mr.K.K.RAMESH, (PARTY IN PERSON) SR No. 97105 CC TO M/s.G.R.ASSOCIATES, IN SR No. 97163
RR TE/	BK/SAR-4 : 26/12/2018 : 3P/6C
	W.P(MD)No.22801 of 2018 26.11.2018

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.K.Ramesh, S/O Kuppusamy Iyer v. the Governmnet of India, Rep.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.K.Ramesh, S/O Kuppusamy Iyer v. the Governmnet of India, Rep.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sumathi, Vs the District Collector

P.Megarajan, Vs the District Collector

P.Rajendra Perumal, Vs the District Collector

Bharathy Kannamma Vs the Superintendent of Police

The Assistant Director of Vs v.Appavoo

The Inspector General of Vs K.Govindasamy