The Madras High Court stated that it has no jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to interfere with the election programme.

The Court held thus while noting that the ongoing Public Interest Litigation, seeking to alter the Lok Sabha Election vote counting date in Tamil Nadu, was a "Publicity Interest Litigation."

The bench of Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy observed, “Nation wide elections are to be held. The Election Commission of India in its wisdom has fixed the dates. Phase-wise elections have been fixed and upon culmination of the last phase of the election, the date of counting is fixed. Heavy responsibility is cast on Election Commission to conduct free and fair election. The Election Commission has to consider various factors such as security, deployment of staff, training of staff and many more aspects.”

The Petitioner, Ezhilan filed the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned notification about Tamil Nadu General Elections to Lok Sabha 2024 dated March 16, 2024 and to quash the impugned portion relating to date of polling and date of counting and advance the date of counting.

On behalf of the Petitioner, Advocate A. Rajini argued that there is a long gap between the date of polling and the date of counting. The same is arbitrary, illegal and against the principles of natural justice.

It was further submitted that directions may be given to change the date mentioned in the impugned notification and advance the date of counting about the State of Tamil Nadu.

As per the Court, the current petition lacks a public cause and the date of polling and the date of counting has to be determined by the Election Commission. The Court also noted that there is no provision mandating counting to occur within a specific timeframe from the polling date.

The Court further noted that the petitioner was not prejudiced.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the PIL.

Cause Title: Ezhilan v. Chief Election Commissioner


Appellant: Adv. A. Rajini

Respondent: Special Government Pleader C. Kathiravan

Click here to read/download Judgment