The Madras High Court on Monday (June 1, 2026) closed as infructuous a writ petition filed by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) in 2016 for the conduct of local body polls in Tamil Nadu by providing adequate representation to the Scheduled Tribes (ST) and by ensuring rotation of reserved seats.

Justice M. Dhandapani closed the case after advocate Richardson Wilson, representing the DMK, informed the court that Justice N. Kirubakaran (since retired) had passed elaborate orders in the case on October 4, 2016, but kept the writ petition pending for reporting compliance of those directives.

The court’s orders

In its 2016 order, the court had issued a slew of directions to the Tamil Nadu State Election Commission (TNSEC) with respect to the conduct of local body polls. The State government was also directed to amend the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Election) Rules, 1995, to ensure the disclosure of criminal antecedents by the candidates.

The court ordered that a sub-rule must be inserted in the 1995 Rules, at the earliest, mandating the candidates desiring to contest in local body polls to file separate affidavits, furnishing full and complete information regarding their criminal background, at the time of filing nominations.

The TNSEC was further directed to reject the nominations of candidates who fail to file such affidavits. The commission was also ordered to publicise the requirement of filing such affidavits among the candidates, as well as the voters, so that the latter could take an informed decision before exercising their franchise.

“The Commission shall consolidate, record, and create a database of the details provided by the candidates in the form of affidavits and upload them on its website,” the court had said, directing the government as well as TNSEC to address concerns regarding reservation of seats and purification of electoral rolls.

“The State Election Commission shall write to recognised and registered political parties/organisations, in exercise of power under Article 243K of the Constitution of India asking them not to field/sponsor any candidate with criminal background/history for the local body election within four weeks to prevent criminalisation and hijacking of local bodies by criminal elements,” the order read.

It went on to state: “It is common knowledge that major political parties are fielding candidates for local body elections, except at the village level. The candidates fielded by them, should be persons with integrity, honesty, and a sense of commitment to serve society. However, invariably, many candidates, who contest the elections, are chosen by political parties, based on their affluence and muscle power and they are also found to be persons with criminal antecedents.“

The court had also remarked: “Of late, media reports reveal many elected representatives of local bodies, belonging to various political parties, being done to death due to their criminal antecedents or illegal mining operations or real estate business. When the State Election Commission, as per the direction given above, writes to all the recognised and registered political parties, calling upon them, not to field any candidate, with criminal background, the political leaders are duty-bound to see that such candidates are not chosen as contestants. The offices of local bodies are not places for profit-making, but for doing service to society.”