Archive · 17 Sep 2026
Madras High Court Declines Stay on Maduranthagam, Dharapuram Bypolls
The Madras High Court was asked to stop two upcoming Assembly bypolls.
The elections are planned for Maduranthagam and Dharapuram on October 6.
The case involved MLAs who resigned and later joined another party.
The petitioner said this could disrespect voters’ original choices and cost the public money.
The government’s lawyer said current law allows resigned MLAs to contest again.
Because of this, he said the elections could not be stopped.
The court did not suspend the bypolls.
It sent the case to another bench and said election authorities should consider rules to prevent democracy from being made a mockery.
The Madras High Court refused to stay the October 6 bypolls in Maduranthagam and Dharapuram.
The petition was filed by advocate K. Suthan, who challenged the elections after six AIADMK MLAs resigned and joined the TVK.
The petitioner argued that resignations followed by recontesting could undermine voters’ choices and waste public funds.
The Advocate General said existing law does not stop resigned MLAs from contesting bypolls.
The court directed the petition and related cases to the Chief Justice’s bench for hearing on September 18, while orally urging guidelines against a “mockery of democracy.”
- Who
- The Madras High Court, advocate K. Suthan, the Election Commission of India, and parties including the AIADMK and TVK are involved.
- What
- The court declined to stay bypolls for the Maduranthagam and Dharapuram Assembly constituencies and transferred the petition to the Chief Justice’s bench.
- When
- The bypolls are scheduled for October 6; the petition was directed to be heard by the First Bench on September 18.
- Where
- The proceedings took place before the Madras High Court in Chennai, Tamil Nadu.
- Why
- The petitioner sought to stop the bypolls, arguing that resignations followed by recontesting for another party could undermine voters’ choices and impose avoidable election costs.
Petitioner’s Concerns
Government’s Position
Whether the bypolls should proceed
Petitioner’s Concerns
The petitioner argued that the elections could insult voters’ original choices because legislators resigned and sought to recontest under another party.
Government’s Position
The Advocate General argued that the bypolls could not be stopped because current law does not prevent resigned MLAs from contesting again.
Need for election rules
Petitioner’s Concerns
The petitioner urged action against resignations that could trigger repeated bypolls and impose a burden on the public exchequer.
Government’s Position
The court did not suspend the elections but orally observed that Parliament and the Election Commission of India should examine the circumstances and frame suitable guidelines.
- Court decision
- The Madras High Court declined to stay the two bypolls.
- Constituencies
- Maduranthagam and Dharapuram Assembly constituencies.
- Scheduled election date
- October 6.
- Petitioner
- Advocate K. Suthan filed the public interest litigation.
- Political development
- The petitioner said six AIADMK MLAs resigned after the elections and joined the Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam.
- Candidates named
- Maragatham Kumaravel and P. Sathyabama were identified as TVK candidates for the two seats.
- Next hearing
- The petition and connected matters were directed to the First Bench for September 18.