Tirupattur TVK MLA’s win by a single vote: Madras High Court rejects election petition filed against his victory

The Madras High Court on Monday (September 28, 2026) rejected an election petition filed against the victory of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) MLA R.

Seenivasa Sethupathy from the Tirupattur constituency in Sivaganga district by a razor-thin margin of just one vote in the 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly polls.

Justice G.K.

Ilanthiraiyan allowed an application filed by the TVK MLA to reject the election petition filed by Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) candidate and former Minister K.R.

Periakaruppan, who had contended that he lost the polls primarily because of the existence of two Legislative Assembly constituencies with the same name ‘Tirupattur’ in Tamil Nadu.

Also Read | Supreme Court stays Madras High Court order on TVK MLA Sethupathi, terms it ‘atrocious’ The judge said one of the main grounds raised by the election petitioner was that one postal vote meant for him in Tiruppatur constituency (number 185) in Sivaganga district was wrongly sent to Tirupattur constituency (number 50) in Tirupattur district.

The petitioner had filed an affidavit sworn by Tirupattur district DMK candidate A.

Nallathambi’s counting agent S.

Rajendran, who claimed to have come across that one postal vote.

However, “the allegation regarding the alleged wrong receipt of one postal ballot rests substantially upon the affidavit of the election agent and, in the absence of any supporting material, the manner in which such alleged irregularity occurred and its actual effect upon the result of the election remains unsubstantiated,” the judge wrote.

He agreed with senior counsel V.

Raghavachari, assisted by Dixita Gohil and Pranjal Agarwal, that the constituency number and not the name of the constituency was the key identifier used by election officials to transport postal votes to their intended destination.

The judge said every postal ballot would be accompanied by Form 13C, which contained full particulars of the concerned constituency, including the constituency number, name, district, and complete address.

Further, the postal ballots get deposited at facilitation centres contemplated under Rule 18A of the Conduct of Elections Rules 1961, and thereafter, the election officials take the responsibility of transporting them.

“The allegation that the identical names of the two Assembly Constituencies resulted in confusion and, consequently, caused a postal ballot to be wrongly sent to another constituency also appears difficult to reconcile with the procedural safeguards governing the handling of postal ballots,” the judge held.

Also Read | TVK’s Tirupattur MLA, who won by one vote, not to take part in trust vote in Assembly: Madras High Court Also, rejecting the other grounds raised by the election petitioner, the judge wrote: “Equally, there is no material to demonstrate any violation of the prescribed procedure which, even if established, could have materially affected the result of the election.

In the absence of any foundational material establishing that exactly one postal ballot was received in the wrong constituency and that such alleged irregularity had any material effect upon the election result, the said allegation, by itself, cannot constitute a complete cause of action.” He accepted the TVK MLA’s plea to reject the election petition at the threshold without taking it to the stage of trial.