Tamil Nadu CM Vijay Seeks Vacating Stay on Bye-Elections to Five Assembly Seats

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay has approached the Madras High Court seeking to vacate an interim order that restrained the Election Commission from issuing notifications for bye-elections to five Assembly constituencies vacated following the resignation of elected candidates.

Vijay made the submission in a counter-affidavit filed in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) moved by advocate K. Venkatachalapathy.

Among the five constituencies is Tiruchirappalli (East), one of the two Assembly seats from which Vijay was elected in the April 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections before subsequently resigning from the seat.

The Madras High Court's First Bench, comprising Chief Justice S. A. Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, had on July 10 passed an interim order restraining the Election Commission from issuing notifications for bye-elections to the vacant seats.

The court had also directed Vijay and four former AIADMK MLAs — M. R. Vijayabaskar of Karur, C. Vijayabaskar of Viralimalai, S. Jayakumar of Perundurai and Esaki Subbaiya of Ambasamudram — to file comprehensive counter-affidavits addressing the factual and legal issues raised in the PIL.

The PIL sought a declaration that vacancies arising from the resignations of returned candidates in the Assembly elections should not be treated as “clear vacancies” for the purpose of conducting bye-elections under Section 151-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

In his affidavit, Vijay urged the court to dismiss the PIL with exemplary costs, arguing that the petitioner had no locus standi to challenge the proposed bye-elections.

He contended that the petitioner was effectively fighting a “proxy war” on behalf of election petitioners and could not rely on election petitions filed by third parties to seek a postponement of the bye-elections.

Vijay further argued that neither the petitioner nor voters in the affected constituencies had demonstrated any genuine grievance. He alleged that the PIL lacked bona fides and had been filed with ulterior motives.

According to Vijay, preventing the bye-elections would deprive several lakh voters in the five constituencies of democratically elected representatives for an indefinite period.

He maintained that the PIL was therefore contrary to the larger public interest and deserved to be dismissed at the threshold.