When the Election Commission canceled the Tamil Nadu by-poll after Jayalalithaa launched welfare programmes

In 1993, the first AIADMK government led by Jayalalitha (as her name was spelled then) was preparing to face a by-election in Ranipet Assembly constituency and Palani Lok Sabha seat on 19 May. Relations between the AIADMK and the Congress, which faced the 1991 general elections as allies, soured then.

The Congress was also expected to enter a muscle-flexing by-poll with the AIADMK, but delayed announcing its candidate.

Tamil Nadu Minister for Food and Cooperatives G. Viswanathan presents lions to Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalitha during her visit to Ranipet in 1993. | Photo Credit: Hindu Archives

On 24 April that year, journalists asked Food Minister G. Viswanathan (now Chancellor, VIT deemed a university) if there was a possibility of the polls being cancelled. He replied that such cancellations may have been done in some North Indian states earlier. But what he could say about Ranipet was that the AIADMK had already made preparations including opening election offices and campaigning etc. He saw no reason why the election should be cancelled.

However, on the night of August 26, the Election Commission canceled the by-elections scheduled for the Ranipet Assembly constituency, saying the state government had violated the model code of conduct by announcing welfare schemes.

Revoking its earlier by-election notification, the Election Commission’s notification said the Commission has asked the state government to clarify press reports on the launch of ₹503 crore welfare schemes and the bifurcation of South Arcot district.

The commission said that the state government’s silence “was tantamount to an admission of the facts reported in connection with the commencement of the said programmes”. The commission pointed out that the decision to divide was announced in the State Assembly only on April 4.

“The Commission, which is entrusted with the sacred responsibility of ensuring free and fair elections under the Constitution, cannot be a mute spectator to such blatant and willful violation of the model code of conduct which has the unequivocal effect of derailing the entire election process in the said Ranipet Assembly constituency,” it said.

“Yesterday’s decision by the Election Commission to cancel the by-election in the Ranipet Assembly constituency in Tamil Nadu is based on violation of the ‘model code of conduct for leadership of political parties and candidates’ by the Chief Minister of the State, Mrs. J. Jayalalitha,” reported The Hindu on April 28, 1993.

Also read | The mother of social systems

“It is regrettable, but the situation was due to a series of misdeeds committed by the AIADMK government,” SR Balasubramanian, leader of the Congress (I) Legislature Party, reacted to the development. He said it was highly inappropriate for the Chief Minister to announce massive social programs at a function in Ranipet. “The responsibility of canceling the by-election lies squarely with the chief minister,” he said.

AIADMK candidate Ranipet Kovi S. Moghanan soon approached the Madras High Court challenging the Election Commission’s cancellation notice.

Mr. Moghanan argued that the Election Commission had sent a communication to the state government on April 16 seeking some clarifications on the launch of welfare programmes, spending on the Chief Minister’s election tour at government expense and the creation of a new district. The Secretary General sent his reply on 19 April and the Commission received it on the same day.

He argued that the model code of conduct was to be enforced only from April 6 and since the Chief Minister had announced the plans for Ranipet on April 5, the code was followed in letter and spirit.

“The announcement of canceling the poll was made at the behest of Mr. TN Seshan, the Chief Election Commissioner, who was brought into action by mala fides and biased against the AIADMK and its leader,” he said. “Since Mr. Seshan was not in New Delhi on April 26, it was not clear whether he exercised his opinion before the notice was issued,” said the submitter (The Hindu Archives).

However, the Madras High Court refused to stay the Election Commission’s notification. “This is not a case of ex parte preliminary injunction. I am not inclined to stay the notice,” Justice T Somasundaram said while issuing the notice to the Election Commission.

According to contemporary reports, referring to the objection to the creation of a new district after Ramaswamy Padayachi, the petitioner’s counsel stated that the political decision to create a new district was taken as early as April 1992. Only the naming was done on 15 April. Moreover, Ranipet was not part of South Arcot or the newly created district and therefore did not violate the code naming.

At this point, the judge said, “In any case, the naming was done on April 15 after the law came into force. We don’t have to be technical. We have to read the entire Election Commission order.”

Subsequently, in late July, the Election Commission announced that polling in Ranipet would now be held on August 19.

Polled votes were counted on September 24. The AIADMK candidate was declared elected with a margin of 12,661 votes over his nearest rival from the DMK, Arcot N. Veerasamy (former minister).

Apart from Mr. Veerasamy and PMK’s KL Elavazhagan, all the other 26 defeated candidates, including M. Thulasi of the Congress(I), lost their deposits. By the way, Thulasi “withdrew from the competition at the last minute due to illness”. He received less than 1,000 votes.

Published – 02 Sep 2026 07:02 IST