In June, C Vijayabaskar (Viralimalai constituency) became the fifth legislator to resign and join TVK
Once their resignations were received under Article 190(3)(b) of the Constitution, the speaker was required to scrutinise them. Under Section 84 of the Representation of the People Act, a defeated candidate may seek a declaration that they were duly elected. In Sivaganga constituency, a former minister who lost by one vote in the 2026 assembly election, approached Madras HC, seeking to restrain the winning candidate from functioning as an MLA and receiving the perks attached to the office.
After the recent TN assembly election, with the Joseph Vijay-led govt falling short of an absolute majority, certain MLAs belonging to AIADMK, which finished third, resigned from the seats they had won and joined the TVK. This requirement was introduced through the 33rd Amendment to the Constitution, which inserted the proviso that the speaker can reject a legislator’s resignation if, after an inquiry, it is found to be not voluntary or genuine.
The petitioner says that such a plea would become infructuous if the ECI notified byelections. Election Commission of India (ECI) recently made a submission before Madras high court , which was hearing a public interest litigation seeking to prevent byelections necessitated by the resignation of AIADMK MLAs. Without justification, the ECI submitted that it would not conduct the byelections until the writ petition was disposed of. The Speaker’s acceptance of the resignations has not been challenged. The motive of the MLAs in resigning, joining another political party and possibly contesting the same constituencies in byelections under their new party’s label cannot form the basis of such litigation. Schedule X of the Constitution, which deals with the disqualification of legislators for defection and empowers the speaker to decide such matters, does not apply to the present case. The PIL merely states that petitions may be filed against the election of these MLAs. Even after several assembly elections were held in other states and when there were vacancies creased immediately the ECI conducted byelections and declared results also. In TN, such actions were not taken and the ECI voluntarily informed the court it would refrain from holding byelections. It must be understood that election petitions need not be filed only by the defeated candidate, even a voter of the constituency can do so. HC granted the relief. However, when the matter reached Supreme Court, it took exception to Madras high court intervening without directing the aggrieved party to pursue an election petition. The question remains, how can the ECI postpone the byelections necessitated by the resignation of elected members? Would this not amount to denying the democratic rights of voters in those constituencies? Will the ECI answer?
The petitioner apparently pleaded before court that if byelections were conducted before the dispute over the resignations of the six MLAs was decided, the petition would become infructuous. Normally, the ECI announces a byelection soon after a constituency is declared vacant, unless less than six months remain before the general election.