The Madras High Court has dismissed a petition seeking directions to election authorities to undertake additional scrutiny of candidates contesting from Scheduled Caste (SC) reserved constituencies in Tamil Nadu. The court held that the law already provides a mechanism to verify candidates’ eligibility and that election-related disputes cannot be addressed through a writ petition during the electoral process.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Arjunan Sampath, who requested the court to direct the Chief Electoral Officer of Tamil Nadu to examine candidates contesting from SC-reserved constituencies in light of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, and a recent Supreme Court judgment.
According to the petitioner, there was a risk that persons who had converted to religions not covered under the constitutional provisions governing Scheduled Castes could continue using earlier caste certificates and contest elections from reserved seats. He argued that existing scrutiny procedures were inadequate and sought stricter verification measures before nominations were accepted.
Election Authorities Oppose the Plea
The Election Commission's counsel opposed the petition, arguing that courts cannot interfere with an election process once it is underway. The respondent submitted that any challenge regarding a candidate’s qualification or eligibility must be raised through an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, after the election results are declared.
The respondent also pointed to Election Commission instructions issued in 2008, which require Returning Officers to verify caste certificates of candidates contesting from reserved constituencies during nomination scrutiny.
Court’s Observations
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan noted that Article 329(b) of the Constitution creates a clear bar against judicial interference in election matters except through the mechanism of an election petition.
The Bench observed that,
“Any grievance concerning the disqualification or false declaration of a candidate must wait until the conclusion of the election and must be ventilated solely through an Election Petition.”
On the issue of verification of Scheduled Caste status, the court found that there was no legal vacuum requiring fresh judicial directions. Referring to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, and Election Commission guidelines, the Bench said the existing framework already requires Returning Officers to satisfy themselves about the caste status of candidates and insist on valid certificates.
The court further observed that Returning Officers possess statutory powers to reject nominations if a candidate is found to be disqualified or ineligible. It also noted that an election petition remains available if any ineligible candidate succeeds in contesting or getting elected.
Court’s Decision
The High Court found that the petitioner had not placed any specific material before the court showing that a candidate had contested using a fraudulent caste certificate or that election officials had ignored such a case.
Holding that existing laws and Election Commission guidelines adequately cover the field, and noting the constitutional bar on interference in election matters, the court dismissed the writ petition and closed the connected interim application.
Case Details:
Case Title: Arjunan Sampath v. Chief Electoral Officer & Principal Secretary to Government
Case Number: W.P. No. 13425 of 2026
Judges: Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan
Decision Date: June 17, 2026
