Madras HC rejects plea to bar resigned MLAs from contesting bypolls

Chennai: The Madras High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to make legislators who resign for political reasons pay the cost of the resulting bypolls and face a five-year ban on contesting elections.

The court said the changes sought by the petitioner would require legislation, which is a matter for Parliament or the legislature.

Judges cannot introduce such provisions through a court order, the bench observed while rejecting the public interest litigation.

The petition was filed by Sudhan, an advocate from Saidapet in Chennai. He argued that legislators who step down soon after winning an election disregard the mandate given to them by voters and force the public to bear the expense of another poll.

He asked the court to direct the Election Commission to devise a procedure requiring such former MLAs to deposit the cost of a bypoll when they file nomination papers to contest it. His petition also sought a legal amendment that would prevent legislators who resign for political reasons from contesting elections for five years.

As an interim measure, Sudhan wanted the court to halt the bypolls in the Madurantakam and Dharapuram constituencies until his petition was decided.

The matter came before a bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan. During the hearing, the petitioner cited the possibility of an elected representative resigning within two weeks of a victory and then entering the contest again as a candidate of another party.

He submitted that legislators who trigger elections in those circumstances should be made responsible for the associated costs.

Even without an existing statutory provision, he argued, the court could issue directions to address the problem. He also asked what would happen if a large number of MLAs resigned at the same time.

The Election Commission opposed the plea, submitting that it had no role in a legislator’s decision to resign after election results were declared.

It also argued that the petition was not fit for consideration by the court.

After hearing the submissions, the bench questioned whether a court could order the changes to the election law that Sudhan sought. It reserved its decision and, in its ruling, dismissed the petition.

The judges held that the proposed requirements and disqualification would have to be considered by lawmakers through the legislative process.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

IANS

[email protected]