2021 TN Assembly Elections | Madras High Court Orders Recounting Of 605 Rejected Postal Ballot Votes In Krishnagiri Constituency

Justice PT Asha directed the Registrar General of Madras High Court to name any of the Registrars to supervise the counting of the postal ballot votes and submit a report on the reasons recorded for rejecting the postal ballot votes, whether reasons were recorded on each postal ballot/cover and whether the number of votes rejected under each head detailed in Form 20 tallied with the number of votes rejected under the respective heads.

The court directed the exercise to be completed within 20 days and also directed the Election Commission to depute two persons to assist in the recounting process.

The court made the directions in an application made by the DMK candidate T Senguttuvan challenging the rejection of 605 postal ballot votes which resulted in the victory of the AIADMK candidate Ashokkumar K. Senguttuvan had argued that there were discrepancies and irregularities in the manner in which the Returning Officer had improperly rejected the postal ballot votes.

Senguttuvan had argued that the postal ballot votes were rejected without informing him or his agents and without giving reasons despite them raising objections against the same. it was also submitted that when Senguttuvan's agent requested to tally the postal votes with the number of valid and invalid votes, the same was also turned down by the officer. Senguttuvan also informed the court that in the Officer's reply containing reasons for rejection, the reason recorded in respect of 80 votes was “others” which is not provided for under the Election rules. Thus, it was argued that the rejection was not following Rule 54A (11) and 54A (8) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961.

On the other hand, the winning candidate Ashokkumar challenged the application and claimed that it was an attempt to conduct a roving enquiry and a fishing expedition. It was argued that the application was made without proper provisions of law. it was contended that the entire election process was done following the Representation of People Act 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules 1961.

The court relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Arikala Narasa Reddy v Venkata Ram Reddy Reddygari in which the Supreme Court had laid down the conditions for recounting. These were –

• The court must be satisfied that a prima facie case is established;
• The material facts and full particulars have been pleaded stating the irregularities in the counting of votes;
• A roving and fishing inquiry should not be directed by way of an order to re-count the votes
• An opportunity should be given to file an objection; and
• The secrecy of the ballot should be guarded.

In the present case, the court, upon perusing the documents submitted by Senguttuvan was convinced that he had set out in detail as to why the rejection of the postal ballot had a bearing on the ultimate result of the election. The court noted that Ashokkumar had won by a slender margin of 794 votes and thus if it was proved that the rules were not followed during rejection, the same would have an impact on the outcome.

Thus, taking into consideration all the relevant factors, the fact that the victory was on a slender margin, and the fact that there was no evidence to prove that Senguttuvan or his agent was informed of the rejection, the court thought that interest of justice would be served only by ordering a recount of the rejected postal ballot votes.

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr.Richardson Wilson for M/s. P.Wilson Associates.

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. B.Arvind Srevatsa

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 131

Case Title: T.Senguttuvan v Ashokkumar K and Others

Case No: O.A.No. 27 of 2024 in E.L.P.No. 9 of 2021