Madras High Court Seeks ECI Explanation Over One-Vote Margin Dispute in Tiruppattur

Chennai, Tamil NAdu - The Madras High Court held a special sitting on Sunday to address an urgent petition filed by DMK leader and former minister K.R. Periakaruppan, who lost the Tiruppattur Assembly seat by a historic margin of just one vote. A vacation bench comprising Justices Victoria Gowri and N. Senthilkumar demanded that the Election Commission of India (ECI) file an affidavit explaining its continued silence regarding a disputed postal ballot that could potentially alter the entire election outcome.

The legal battle stems from the closely contested 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, where R. Seenivasa Sethupathi of the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) was declared the winner after securing 83,365 votes against Periakaruppan’s 83,364.

Periakaruppan’s writ petition argues that the election result hinges on a single postal ballot that was intended for the Tiruppattur constituency in Sivagangai district (No. 158) but was mistakenly delivered to another constituency with the same name in Vellore district (No. 50). According to the petitioner, the ballot was rejected at the second location instead of being redirected to the correct returning officer.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the DMK leader, termed the situation an "extraordinary circumstance" that is not explicitly covered by standard election rules. He argued that since the margin of victory is exactly one vote, the recovery and counting of this single valid ballot would result in a tie, necessitating a draw of lots as per constitutional law.

The ECI maintained that once results are officially declared, the Returning Officer no longer has official authority over the matter. The commission argued that any factual verification or reopening of sealed ballots would require a comprehensive trial-like process rather than a summary writ proceeding.

However, the High Court bench observed, "If the main issue is the disputed postal ballot, the commission must answer it directly.” The court questioned why the ECI had failed to respond to Periakaruppan’s multiple representations before the final declaration of results.

Also Read: 'Use Petrol, Diesel Sparingly': PM Modi Amid Global Energy Crunch