OA/912/2026 of SENTHILKUMAR I.P. Vs NAZEER RAJA on 10 November 2026

1. Nazeer Raja S/o Gouse Maideen, Candidate -Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagm, 132 - Dindigul Legislative Assembly Constituency, No. 34/B, Bharathi Hostel Road, Indira Nagar, Dindigul.

2. Sreenivasan. C H3/20, R.M. Colony, E.V.R Salai, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, (All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam -Two Leaves)

3. Mutharasi. S M2/22, 4th Cross Street, R.M. Colony, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, ( Naam Tamilar Katchi - Farmer Carrying Plough)

4. Gopi Krishnan Pillai. S 47, Parvathi Illam, West Ramanatha Puram, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk,

Dindigul District - 624 001, ( Rashtriya Samaj Dal (R) – Ring)

5. Sheik Bareeth. B 39 , Asath Street, Asanath Puram, Pallapatti , Begampur PO, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 002, (Tamizhaga Vaazhvurimai Katchi - Camera)

6. Pradeep. M 5/5 NA, Valluvar Colony, Ward - 5, Nandavanapatti, Seelapadi, Dindugul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005, (Puthiya Tamilagam - Gas Cylinder )

7. Ramuthevar. P 13C, Subba Pillai Lane, Pensioner Street, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001. ( All India Puratchithalaivar Makkal Munnettra Kazhagam - Coconut Farm)

8. Anis Babu. M No. 22/42, Yousufiya Nagar, Begampur, Pallapatti Post, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 002, (Independent – Diamond)

9. Arockia Dass. J 239, Ramaiyan Patti, Meenachi Nayakakan Patti Post, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 002, ( Independent – Ballon)

10. Umar Ali. R 39/86 A, Yousufiya Nagar, Begampur Post, Pallapatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 002, ( Independent - Computer )

11. Ganesh Perumal. D 4/37, South Street, Chennamanaikenpatty, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, ( Independent – Batsman)

12. Karmegam, R 142/31-1, Naveen Nagar, Thamaraipaadi, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005, (Independent – Laptop)

13. Saranya. M 25, Rajalakshmi Nagar, Angalaeshwari Kovil, Anumantha Nagar, Balakrishnapuram, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005, (Independent -Truck)

14. Seenivasan. P V 268, Poovai Kilavan Patty, Jotthampatty, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District -624 308, (Independent - Battery Torch)

15. Selvadhayanithi. M 171A, Kathiraiyan Kulam, Silvarpatti, S. Vadipatty Post , Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 622, (Independent – Socks)

16. Nagaraj. N 3/973, N.S. Nadar Thottam, Ward - 5, Balakrishnapuram Pudur, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005, (Independent -Road Roller )

17. Babu. S 25C, Shivaji Ganesan 1st Street, West Ashok Nagar, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001,

(Independent - Pencil Box)

18. Muniyappan. M43, Ellaipatty, Kamatchipuram, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 622 (Independent - Belt )

19. Rajendran.G M2 62 (2), R.M. Colony, 13th Cross Street, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001. (Independent - Bat )

20. The Returning Officer, 132 - Dindigul Assembly Constituency, Dindigul. ..Respondent(s) in both O.As ELP No. 27 of 2026 CNR:{HCMA011364372026} Nazeer Raja S/o Gouse Maideen, Candidate -Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagm, 132 - Dindigul Legislative Assembly Constituency, No. 34/B, Bharathi Hostel Road, Indira Nagar, Dindigul. ..Applicant(s) Vs

1. Senthilkumar I.P. No. 5 , Seelapadi Main Road, Alagiri Goundanur, Seelapadi, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005 (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam - Rising Sun)

2. Sreenivasan. C H3/20, R.M. Colony, E.V.R Salai, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, (All India Anna Dravida Munnetra

Kazhagam -Two Leaves)

3. Mutharasi. S M2/22, 4th Cross Street, R.M. Colony, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, (Naam Tamilar Katchi - Farmer Carrying Plough)

4. Gopi Krishnan Pillai. S 47, Parvathi Illam, West Ramanatha Puram, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, (Rashtriya Samaj Dal (R) – Ring)

5. Sheik Bareeth. B 39 , Asath Street, Asanath Puram, Pallapatti , Begampur PO, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 002, (Tamizhaga Vaazhvurimai Katchi - Camera)

6. Pradeep. M 5/5 NA, Valluvar Colony, Ward - 5, Nandavanapatti, Seelapadi, Dindugul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005, (Puthiya Tamilagam - Gas Cylinder)

7. Ramuthevar. P 13C, Subba Pillai Lane, Pensioner Street, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001. (All India Puratchithalaivar Makkal Munnettra Kazhagam - Coconut Farm)

8. Anis Babu. M No. 22/42, Yousufiya Nagar, Begampur, Pallapatti Post, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 002, (Independent – Diamond)

9. Arockia Dass. J 239, Ramaiyan Patti, Meenachi Nayakakan Patti Post, Dindigul West Taluk,

Dindigul District - 624 002, (Independent – Balloon)

10. Umar Ali. R 39/86 A, Yousufiya Nagar, Begampur Post, Pallapatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 002, (Independent - Computer)

11. Ganesh Perumal. D 4/37, South Street, Chennamanaikenpatty Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, (Independent – Batsman)

12. Karmegam, R 142/31-1, Naveen Nagar, Thamaraipaadi, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005, ( Independent – Laptop)

13. Saranya. M 25, Rajalakshmi Nagar, Angalaeshwari Kovil, Anumantha Nagar, Balakrishnapuram, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 005, ( Independent -Truck)

14. Seenivasan. P V 268, Poovai Kilavan Patty, Jotthampatty, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District -624 308, ( Independent - Battery Torch)

15. Selvadhayanithi. M 171A, Kathiraiyan Kulam, Silvarpatti, S. Vadipatty Post , Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 622, ( Independent – Socks)

16. Nagaraj. N 3/973, N.S. Nadar Thottam, Ward - 5, Balakrishnapuram Pudur, Dindigul East Taluk,

Dindigul District - 624 005, (Independent -Road Roller)

17. Babu. S 25C, Shivaji Ganesan 1st Street, West Ashok Nagar, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001, ( Independent - Pencil Box)

18. Muniyappan. M43, Ellaipatty, Kamatchipuram, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 622 (Independent - Belt )

19. Rajendran.G M2 62 (2), R.M. Colony, 13th Cross Street, Chettinayakkanpatti, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District - 624 001. (Independent - Bat )

20. The Returning Officer, 132 - Dindigul Assembly Constituency, Dindigul. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER in

OA No. 912 of 2026

: Original Application filed to strike off paragraphs 6 to 15 in the above Election Petition No.27 of 2026. PRAYER in

OA No. 913 of 2026

: Original Application filed to reject the above Election Petition No.27 of 2026. PRAYER in

ELP No. 27 of 2026

: Election Petition filed under Section 80A, 81, 82, 83, 100(1)(d)(iii) and 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 read with Rule 2 of the Rules of Madras High Court – Election Petition, 1967;

a. Declare the election of the Returned Candidate / 1st Respondent, Mr.I.P.Senthil (M.P. Senthil) from No. 132,

Dindigul Assembly Constituency in the 17th Tamil Nadu State Legislative Assembly Election held on 23.04.2026, as void under Section 100 (1) (d) (iii) and /or Section 100 (1)

(d) (iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951;

b. Direct a recount of the votes recorded in the EVMs pertaining to the 22nd and 23rd rounds of counting at No. 132, Dindigul Assembly Constituency in the election held on 23.04.2026;

c. Declare the Petitioner herein as the duly elected Member of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly from No. 132, Dindigul Assembly Constituency in the election held on 23.04.2026, in the event the recount reveals the Petitioner to have secured higher Votes; and

d. Award the costs of this Petition and pass such other suitable orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For both O.As:- For Applicant(s): Mr.Richardson Wilson For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Arvind Srevatsa for Mrs.Ramya M.B. Assisted by Mr.Parasaran P.A for R1 Mr.P.M.Navaneetha Pandian for R13 Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan for R20

In E.P.No.27 of 2026:- For Petitioner (s): Mr.B.Arvind Srevatsa for Ms.Ramya M.B. Assisted by Mr.Parasaran P.A For Respondent(s): Mr.Richardson Wilson for R1 Mr.P.M.Navaneetha Pandian for R13 Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan for R20

COMMON ORDER

The first respondent/ the Returned Candidate, whose election had been challenged had taken out the present applications to strike out paragraphs 6 to 15 in the Election Petition as also to reject the said Election Petition.

2. Heard, Mr.Richardson Wilson, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in both O.As and for the first respondent in E.P. Mr.B.Arvind Srevatsa, learned counsel appearing for Ms.Ramya M.B., learned counsel appearing on behalf of first respondent in both the O.As and petitioner in E.P, assisted by the learned counsel Mr.Parasaran P.A. Mr.P.M.Navaneetha Pandian, learned counsel appearing on behalf of R13 and Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of R20 in both O.As and E.P.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant at the out set would submit that the Election Petition is devoid of material facts which are required to maintain

the Election Petition. He would submit that the primordial grounds for the present Election Petition is with regard to the counting of votes which had been duly carried out as per the procedure laid down. The claim made by the first respondent without alleging any specific violation and making a bald allegations cannot hold the Election Petition maintainable. He would further submit that a Candidate would lead during a particular phase but, having not secured votes in the other booths which are counted thereafter, the candidate cannot be permitted to ride on a slender lead in earlier rounds.

4. Relying upon various judgments, he would submit that an Election Petition must contain a concise statement of material facts which are relied upon. That apart, he would submit that the material fact should include positive statement of facts as also a positive averment of a negative fact, if so necessary. If such material facts are failed to be pleaded, it would make the Election Petition fatal as no amendment to the pleadings is permissible to introduce such material facts. He would submit that the pleadings cannot be allowed to be vague. He would further submit that if the Election Petition does not furnish a cause of action which includes the material facts, the Election Petition should be summarily rejected.

5. He would further submit, a failure to aver a single material fact which would lead to an incomplete cause of action is also liable to be rejected and taking this Court through the Election Petition, he would submit that even though, there is a claim of improper counting, there are no material facts to establish as to how such improper counting had benefited the applicant in being declared as a Returning Candidate. He would submit that the Courts have repeatedly stressed upon the importance of a pleading in the Election Petition and in this case, he would submit that except making bald, frivolous and vexatious allegations, there is no material facts to sustain the Election Petition.

6. Further relying upon the instructions given by the Election Commission of India, which according to him has statutory force, he would submit that the counting in the Election have been properly done. He would further submit that if such was the allegations that has been made, there is no explanation as to why there is no application for recount as provided under the Rules or as to why there was no objection that was made to the Returning Officer. He would submit that only a representation had been made to the District Election Officer and not before the Returning Officer. Having failed to record its objections before the Returning Officer, the first respondent cannot be heard to contend that there was a violation in the counting process. Having failed to record its objection before the Returning Officer, the reliance placed upon the representation to the District Election Officer could only be an after thought at the aid and advice of the disgruntled persons making untenable allegations of facts which had not taken place. He would further submit that even in the representation to the District Election Officer, no reference has been made to the various allegations that is sought to be made in the present Election Petition which would only mean that the first respondent has been attempting to build up imaginary facts to sustain his Election Petition. Hence, he would seek this Court to reject the Election Petition or otherwise strike of paragraphs 6 to 15 in the Election Petition.

7. Countering his arguments, Mr. Mr.B.Arvind Srevatsa learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would submit that the conduct of the applicant in taking out two mutually inconsistent applications to reject and to strike off the Election Petition would itself show that there are material facts to sustain the Election Petition and it is only an attempt by the applicant to delay the process of the present Election Petition. He would further submit that the allegations of vagueness and bereft material facts are imaginary and taking this Court through the Election Petition, he would submit that the material facts have been pleaded in the Election Petition and they would be substantiated through proper evidences during the course of trial.

8. He would submit that the statement of facts relating to sending out of the representatives of the first respondent could be substantiated during the examination of the Returning Officer on whose instance they were sent out. He would submit that the procedure adopted by the Returning Officer is in violation of the Acts and Rules. He would further submit that the victory of the applicant was circulated to the media even without the complete counting of votes which would itself show that the election had been rigged by the Returning Candidate/ the applicant with aid and assistance of the Election Officers.

9. Drawing attention to the Enactment, he would submit that the material facts had not been defined in the Enactment and the same had been interpreted by this Court in various decisions. He would submit that the Election Petition discloses the primary facts which contemplates a cause of action upon which a verdict could be given by this Court. He would further submit that the attempt made by the applicant seeking for a reliefs under the Original Applications which in effect tantamounts to an alternate relief would itself show that the applications filed by the applicant are devoid of merits.

10. He would further submit that the contentions as regards to the non- disclosures of the Agents who were directed to be sent out by the Returning Officer was wholly unnecessary as the records would itself speak, as the appointment of the every Counting Agents under the relevant form is sanctioned by the Returning Officer who also retains a copy of the same. There can be no element of surprise for the Returning Candidate/ the applicant as he is also aware of the manner in which the counting had taken place and hence, he cannot be allowed to contend that there are no material facts.

11. In support of his contention, he had also relied upon the various judgments as to why this Court should not strike off the pleadings and reject the Election Petition. Hence, he prays this Court to dismiss the Election Petition.

12. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record before this Court.

13. On a primordial contention that no material facts had been pleaded, the present Applications had been taken out by the applicant who is the Returning Candidate. The primary claim of the first respondent/ election petitioner is that as there was a fault in the EVMs during a particular round of counting. The VVPAT Machines were pressed into service at which point of time, the Agents of the first respondent were sent out. A further allegation is also levelled of a pre-mature declaration of result even before the counting concluded. A further allegation regarding to a violation of a mandatory procedure as prescribed under Rule 56 (c) (2) as the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 has also been made. It is the claim of the Returning Candidate that there has been no disclosure of material facts.

14. There is no dispute that the Election Petition should disclose all the material facts that are relevant for an adjudication by the Court. It is also to be noted that the term ‘material facts’ is also prefixed by the “term concise statement”. Neither the terminology concise statement of material facts or material facts are not defined under the Act. The material facts have been held to be a basic and primary facts which is to be proved by the party to establish an existence of cause of action. A cause of action is a bundle of facts and such material facts would depend upon the facts of each case. Such material facts should include a positive statement of fact and also a positive averment of a negative fact, if it is so required.

15. That apart, violations/ non-compliance of any Provisions of the Act or the Rules must be cogently averred. Such pleadings should also be not scandalous, frivolous or vexatious. Such a strict view of the pleadings which is required in an Election Petition, cannot be treated lightly for it to be used in a fanciful manner to give a person who invokes the same as a handle for vexatious purposes. Only in that regard, the material facts had been held to be much necessary for maintaining an Election Petition.

16. In the present case, the Election Petition had been taken out by the first respondent primarily contending that during the counting of the 13th round in respect of a Polling Station, there was a fault in the EVM. But, however, without completing the counting of all the EVMs in all the rounds, the VVPATs of the faulted EVMs were taken out after driving out the Agents of the first respondent who were present.

17. That apart, in respect of rounds 22 & 23, the counting process was improperly conducted and was only under taken through VVPAT slips without adherence to the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Rules. A bald allegation have been made that without a direction from the Returning Officer, a resort to VVPAT counting was made. It is not known as to why there has been no objections were raised or recorded by the Agent of the first respondent with the Returning Officer immediately on the occurrence of such violations and was only made to the District Election Officer much after the declaration of the results. Even in the representation that was sent much after the declaration of the results, only allegations with regard to rounds 22 & 23 were made and allegations with regard to the 13th round of the Poll Booth 172 was not raised. It was always open to the first respondent to have signed in the form relating to the Declaration of the Results recording his objections. He had not only refused to pin down his signature in the said Form but, had never raised any objections on the violations immediately thereafter, with the Returning Officer. When the procedure contemplates filing of objections or making representations to the Returning Officer, a failure of the first respondent or his Agents to adhere to the said procedure and raise allegations thereafter with an other Authority namely the District Election Officer on one ground and filing the Election Petition raising further grounds would only bring this Court to the conclusion that such

averments have been made only as an after thought.

18. That apart, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the facts that have been pleaded cannot be said to be a material facts as required to be pleaded in the Election Petition. This Court had discussed supra as to why the material facts are relevant. The relevancy of material facts to reject the Election Petition for failure to disclose the material facts is a power that could be vested with this Court under its Original Side Rules/ this Court’s Election Petition Rules read with Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

19. The powers of this Court to reject the Election Petition on failure to disclose the material facts is akin to the power vested with the Commercial Court under Order XIII A as amended in the CPC to pass a summary Judgment. This is to avoid unnecessary litigation which leads to wasting the precious judicial time of the Courts. The Courts cannot be a fait accomplice to the fanciful litigation at the hands of the litigant.

20. For the aforesaid reasons, as this Court has found that there are no material facts which as required to be pleaded is present and the Election Petition is liable to be dismissed and hence, the O.A.No.912 of 2026 to strike off paragraphs 6 to 15 in the above Election Petition No.27 of 2026 is not gone into by this Court.

21. Accordingly, O.A.No.912 of 2026 stands closed, O.A.No.913 of 2026 filed to reject the Election Petition stands allowed and Election Petition No.27 of 2026 is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 10.11.2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No GBA

K.KUMARESH BABU J. GBA A Pre-delivery order made in OA Nos. 912 & 913 of 2026 in ELP No. 27 of 2026 10.11.2026