"Did Not Object To Final List": Madras High Court Dismisses Plea For Conducting Special Polling In Coimbatore For Those Left From Voters' List

A bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice G Chandrasekharan noted that the Final Voters List was published in January while the provisional list was published even before that. The court then opined that it could not pass any orders at this point, after the polling, when the petitioner had not raised any objection to the voters list earlier.

“The polling has already taken place. The counsel for ECI informs that the final list was published in January 2024. The provisional list was published even before that. The petitioner did not raise any objection to the provisional or final list. In light of the submission and the facts of the case, no orders can be passed now,” the court said.

The petitioner Suthanthira Kannan, a doctor residing in Australia, in his plea stated that when he came to Coimbatore to fulfill his fundamental duty of casting a vote, his and his wife's names were missing from the Voter's list. Kannan submitted that although his name was present in the Voter's List in 2019 and 2021, it was absent in the present list due to the arbitrary and inefficient way the voter's list was prepared.

Kannan further submitted that deprivation of the voting right amounts to infringement of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution. Kannan submitted that as per Section 22 of the Representation of Peoples Act, before removing a person's name from the voter's list, the electoral registration officer is duty-bound to give the person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of the action proposed to be taken. He added that this procedure is not an empty formality, but a procedure founded on principles of natural justice, which if violated makes the action arbitrary and illegal. He also submitted that no such action had been taken in the present case.

Thus, Kannan sought directions to the election commission to give an opportunity to those persons whose names were omitted, to be permitted to poll by notifying a polling booth in the area so that those persons could exercise their franchise. He also sought to stay the counting of votes and declaration of results until such an opportunity was given.

When the matter was taken up on Tuesday, Advocate Niranjan Rajagopal argued that even as per the petitioner's submission, he was not a person ordinarily residing in the constituency. He also informed the court that the petitioner's name had been removed from the Voters list in the 2021 Assembly Elections itself.

Thus, considering all the facts, the court was not inclined to grant any reliefs and dismissed the plea.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 178

Case Title: Suthanthira Kannan v Election Commission of India and Others

Case No: WP 12499 of 2024