Election Commission has no authority, says EPS faction after Madras HC paves way for panel to hear AIADMK symbol dispute

“The order of stay granted stands vacated, of course, with the caveat that the enquiry is to be conducted within the four corners of paragraph 15 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968,” the bench said.

The controversy began in February 2024, when an individual named S Surya Moorthi submitted a representation to the ECI citing ongoing civil suits regarding the party’s leadership while seeking to freeze AIADMK’s election symbol. He later filed a writ petition asking the court to direct the ECI to consider his plea.

In its ruling Wednesday, the court clarified that the ECI’s initial hearing must be confined solely to determining the existence of a dispute as defined in paragraph 15, which governs the poll body’s authority to decide which faction of a divided party is the legitimate representative. “Once it rules on the jurisdiction, the ECI can proceed further depending on the conclusion on the jurisdiction,” the court said.

The HC, in December 2024, recorded the ECI’s submission that it would decide on the representation within four weeks, after which the poll body began issuing notices to AIADMK on similar representations from expelled party members, including P Ravindranath, former MP and the son of ousted AIADMK leader O Panneerselvam, as well as senior leaders K C Palanisamy, and V Pugazhendi.

AIADMK subsequently moved the court to halt the ECI’s proceedings, arguing that the poll body had no jurisdiction over intra-party disputes. Justice Subramanian, while granting the interim stay on January 9, questioned how the ECI could “venture upon to decide intra-party issues, especially when they were a subject matter of multiple civil suits pending before the High Court”.

In its response, the ECI argued that it had not yet assumed jurisdiction but was merely examining whether it had the authority to do so. However, EPS and his supporters maintained that the ECI had overstepped its constitutional mandate by attempting to adjudicate an internal party matter.

With this, the Commission must first determine whether there is a legitimate dispute before it can rule on who represents the party.

The ruling could have significant implications for AIADMK’s political future, particularly with the assembly elections scheduled later this year. If the ECI ultimately decides that the dispute merits further scrutiny, AIADMK’s leadership and its iconic ‘Two Leaves’ symbol could face prolonged legal battles.

Expelled AIADMK leader and former Chief Minister, Panneerselvam, known popularly as OPS, welcomed the court’s decision.

“Several court rulings have established that the ECI has the authority to intervene in the affairs of political parties, as per the provisions of The Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Madras High Court has reaffirmed this by vacating the stay against the ECI’s proceedings regarding the AIADMK’s internal matters,” he said.

His close associate and former AIADMK leader Pugazhendi also hailed the ruling. “This is a victory in our long-standing legal battle. We will continue our fight before the ECI to free the party and its symbol from EPS’s control,” he said.

But the EPS faction has strongly opposed the court order arguing that the ECI lacks the authority to intervene in internal disputes. Rajya Sabha MP and former law minister, C Ve Shanmugam, said the ECI’s role in political party affairs was limited.

“The ECI has no authority to interfere in the internal matters of political parties,” he said, citing past rulings of the Supreme Court and Madras HC. He pointed out that the ECI had already accepted amendments to AIADMK’s bye-laws, giving EPS the authority to sign Forms A and B for candidates fielded under the party’s symbol. “How can the ECI now go against its own decision?” he asked.