1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.11.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P (MD)No.12462 of 2011 (*)S.M.CHELLAM ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Election Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Election Commission, No.6, Revathy Street, 100 Feet Road, Vadapalani, Chennai-26. 2. The District Election Officer/ District Collector, Ramanathapuram District. 3. The Returning Officer/Commissioner, Paramakudi Panchayat Union, Ramanathapuram District. 4. Kalidass 5. The Inspector, Town Police Station, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents (*)AMENDED MADE AS PER ORDER IM MP(MD)No. 1 OF 2011 DATED 22.11.2011 PRAYER : Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first, second and third respondent to enquire into the issue on the basis of the recorded videograph in the counting spot and pass appropriate order considering representation of the petitioner dated 21.10.2011 and pass appropriate orders to recount the votes in the Peerkankurichy Panchayat for the President post. For Petitioner : Mr.L.Madhusudhanan For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.K.Mahendran Special Government Pleader for State Election Commission For R – 5 : Mr.R.Karthikeyan Additional Government Pleader O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his representation and to conduct an enquiry. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2. Heard Mr.L.Madhusudhanan, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Mr.K.Mahendran, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the fifth respondent. 3. The petitioner contested for Election to the post of President of Peerkankurichy Panchayat, in the Election held on 19.10.2011. His grievance is that when the counting was in progress, there was a scuffle resulting in the petitioner being thrown out and literally prevented from entering the counting hall. 4. According to the petitioner, he was detained at the police station from 11.30 a.m onwards and that therefore, he could not participate in the counting process. Therefore, he seeks a direction to the respondents to look into the video recording and to consider his grievance. 5. Unfortunately, the allegation made by the petitioner requires evidence to be recorded. The question as to whether he was physically detained and the question as to whether the video recording has been truthfully made or not, are all questions that require to be decided only after taking evidence. Therefore, appropriate remedy open to the petitioner is only to raise an Election Dispute. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to raise an Election Dispute. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) (*)AMENDMENT MADE AS PER ORDER MP(MD)No. 1Of 2011 dated 22.11.2011 Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To TO BE SUBSTITUTED TO THE ORDER ALREADY DESPATCHED ON 21.11.2011 1. The State Election Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Election Commission, No.6, Revathy Street, 100 Feet Road, Vadapalani, Chennai-26. 2. The District Election Officer/ District Collector, Ramanathapuram District. 3. The Returning Officer/Commissioner, Paramakudi Panchayat Union, Ramanathapuram District. 4. The Inspector, Town Police Station, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District. 1CC TO THE SPL. GOVT PLEADER SR: 37580: Ps/ GH : 16.11.2011 : DM::2011:NOVEMBER:23:: W.P (MD)No.12462 of 2011 02.11.2011 2P:6C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/