The Election Commission of India has informed the Madras High Court that it will not notify bye-elections for five key assembly constituencies in Tamil Nadu until election petitions are resolved.

  • The ECI will not conduct bypolls for Tiruchi East, Perundurai, Ambasamudram, Viralimalai, and Karur.
  • The decision stems from pending election petitions where claimants seek to be declared the 'returned candidate'.
  • Legal precedent from the Supreme Court prevents bypolls if competing claims to a seat exist under Section 84 of the RP Act.

The Election Commission of India (ECI) informed the Madras High Court on Monday that it does not intend to notify bye-elections for five specific Assembly constituencies in Tamil Nadu. The constituencies involved are Tiruchi East, Perundurai, Ambasamudram, Viralimalai, and Karur.

In a counter affidavit filed by Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Archana Patnaik, the Commission stated that the decision is rooted in the pending disposal of election petitions challenging the previous election results. The submission was made in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) before the division bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan.

Read Also:Political Row Erupts Over Congress 'Chhatro Ki Goonj' Event as BJP Alleges Paid Influencer Campaign

The Legal Conflict: Section 84 vs. Section 151-A

The crux of the legal impasse lies in the interpretation of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. While Section 151-A mandates bypolls within six months of a vacancy, the ECI has cited historical judicial precedents to justify the delay.

Conducting a bye-election while a petitioner seeks declaration as the returned candidate could lead to multiple competing claims for the same seat.

The ECI highlighted the 1967 Supreme Court verdict in Sanjeevayya versus The Election Tribunal, which established that the ECI is not bound to hold a bye-election if a petitioner has moved an application under Section 84 to be declared the winning candidate. Furthermore, the 2010 case of ECI vs. Telangana Rashtra Samithi reinforced that the mandate for quick bypolls cannot override the rights of election petitioners.

Political Context and Implications

The political landscape in Tamil Nadu has been significantly impacted by the resignations of several high-profile leaders. Following the May 2026 elections, leaders including Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay and others had vacated their seats in these five constituencies. However, because the petitioners in these cases are not merely contesting the results but are actively claiming the seats for themselves, a legal vacuum has been created.

BozokMedia analysis shows that this delay could lead to prolonged periods of representation gaps in these constituencies, potentially impacting local governance and administrative efficiency while the judiciary deliberates on the validity of the original mandates.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why can't the ECI hold elections immediately under Section 151-A?
Because Section 84 claims (seeking to be declared the winner) must be harmonized with Section 151-A to prevent competing claims to a single seat.

2. Which constituencies are affected by this legal stay?
Tiruchi East, Perundurai, Ambasamudram, Viralimalai, and Karur.

Did You Know?: The Representation of the People Act was amended in 1996 specifically to speed up the process of filling casual vacancies through Section 151-A.