Follow:
- Next story UPDATES’Do You Want To Make This Country An Open Jail’ : Justice (Retd) Chandru Speaks Against CAA-NRC
- Previous story [12/30, 16:40] Sekarreporter 1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1211605395753463809?s=08 [12/30, 16:40] Sekarreporter 1: [12/30, 16:25] Karventhan Vidurhaisiruthai: The Opposition parties DMK, VCK and others filed a batch of writ petitions seeking for video coverage of counting of votes in local bodies elections through out tamilnadu and a direction to comply with rules 60 to 69 of TN Panchayat Elections Rules 1996, based on the representations sent by the opposition parties to State Election Commission. All the writ petition came up for hearing before the Honble Vacation Bench of Madras High Court today. The Opposition Parties were represented by various counsels under the lead of Senior Counsel Mr.N.R.Elango, on behalf of DMK’s party functionary Mr.R.S.Bharathi, MP, Rajya Sabha and Ms.S.Deepika, Counsel representing VCK Legal wing Secretary Mr.D.Parventhan. whereas State Election Commission was represented by Senior Counsel Mr.Ar.L.Sunderesan. it was represented by State Election Commission that when they are strictly following the chapter VI (Rules 60 to 69) of TN Panchayat Rules, there is no question of directing them by way of mandamus sought by the Petitioners. In the course of arguement and in the Counter Affidavit filed by Commission, it was informed that the Returning Officers are instructed to install CCTV Cameras in counting booths and the coverage would not be only focussing the ballot papers which was vehemently opposed by all the Petitioner Counsels and district wise malpractices and incidents were reported before the court. Quiet interestingly, the State Government And Election Commission submitted that the Writ Petitions are merely based and presumptions and apprehensions and no past history was recorded. Whereas the same was countered by Petitioner’s Counsel that their (commission) own circular admitted about the past history of malpractices and booth capturing etc., Ultimately the Election Commission conceded to the fact that they would delete the line mentioning about the ” recording would not cover ballot papers ” in their circular dated 13.12.2019. Recording their ( State Election Commission) submission that the counting process would be videographed in the presence of candidates and their agents, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. [12/30, 16:26] Sekarreporter 1: 👍
Recent Posts
- bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N Bhatti, two special leave petitions challenging the order was heard. Appearing for the State, Senior Advocate Amit Anand Tiwari argued that the State police had filed a chargesheet, contrary to what was argued before the High Court that no chargesheet
- MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI W.P. Nos.5972, 5974, 5976, 5979, 6466, 6469, 6470, 6483, 6484, 7442 7448, 7449 and 7451 of 2025 &
- Madras HC sets-aside order passed by the Revenue as ex-parte in light of proceedings being carried out through the common portal; Observing that the notices including reminder notices were uploaded only through the common portal under the tab “View Additional Notices/Orders”, holds that “….when the respondent-Department realizes the fact that the notice effected via, On-line
- Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy W. P.No.5539 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.6103 & 6104 of 2025 Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders
- SC orders probe into TN caste certificates The SC said that “once the report comes, we shall thereafter proceed to look into each of the petitions independently.”
More
Recent Posts
- bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N Bhatti, two special leave petitions challenging the order was heard. Appearing for the State, Senior Advocate Amit Anand Tiwari argued that the State police had filed a chargesheet, contrary to what was argued before the High Court that no chargesheet
- MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI W.P. Nos.5972, 5974, 5976, 5979, 6466, 6469, 6470, 6483, 6484, 7442 7448, 7449 and 7451 of 2025 &
- Madras HC sets-aside order passed by the Revenue as ex-parte in light of proceedings being carried out through the common portal; Observing that the notices including reminder notices were uploaded only through the common portal under the tab “View Additional Notices/Orders”, holds that “….when the respondent-Department realizes the fact that the notice effected via, On-line
- Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy W. P.No.5539 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.6103 & 6104 of 2025 Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders
- SC orders probe into TN caste certificates The SC said that “once the report comes, we shall thereafter proceed to look into each of the petitions independently.”
