2 min readNew DelhiUpdated: May 12, 2026 04:37 PM IST
Challenging the order of the Madras High Court passed earlier in the day, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) MLA R Seenivasa Sethupathi on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court after being restrained from participating in the floor test scheduled Wednesday. Sethupathi had defeated DMK leader Periakaruppan by one vote.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi is believed to have mentioned the matter before the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant for urgent listing following which the matter was listed on Wednesday.
High Court order
The Madras High Court had restrained Sethupathi, who won the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections from Tiruppattur district by one vote, from voting or taking part in the floor test of the legislative assembly.
A bench of Justices L Victoria Gowri and N Senthilkumar passed the interim order on a plea filed by K R Periakaruppan, who is a leader of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). Periakaruppan had lost the election to Sethupathi by one vote. Periakaruppan had alleged irregularities and discrepancies in vote counting.
“There shall be an order of interim injunction restraining the sixth respondent/returned candidate from voting or otherwise taking part in any floor test, including confidence motion, no-confidence motion, trust vote or any voting proceeding in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly where the numerical strength of the House is tested, until further orders of this Court,” the Madras High Court ordered.
The court remarked that if Sethupathi participates in such proceedings and his vote becomes decisive, the consequence may travel far beyond the constituency and affect the constitutional governance of the state. It however clarified that the order would not deem his election as void.
“We are not, at this stage, declaring the election of the sixth respondent void. Nor is this Court seating the petitioner in his place. We are only considering whether, pending prima facie scrutiny of serious electoral anomalies in a one-vote result, the returned candidate should be permitted to participate in a proceeding where his vote may alter the balance of power in the House,” the court observed.
© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
