Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My Money
News Columns | Show StopperStraight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Himachal HC issues notices to EC, others on PIL challenging Anurag Sharma's election to Rajya Sabha

Congress candidate Anurag Sharma was elected unopposed in the lone Rajya Sabha seat in Himachal Pradesh on March 9
Congress leader Anurag Sharma (left) with Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu, Deputy CM Mukesh Agnihotri, and others. Tribune file

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has issued notices to the Election Commission of India, the Central and state governments, the returning officer and MP Anurag Sharma on a PIL challenging Sharma's election as a Rajya Sabha member from the state.

Advertisement

Taking up a public interest litigation filed by Advocate Vinay Sharma, a Bench of Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi directed all the respondents to file their replies by May 21.

Advertisement

Congress candidate Anurag Sharma was elected unopposed in the lone Rajya Sabha seat in Himachal Pradesh on March 9.

The petition alleged that Sharma was holding contracts with the state government at the time of filing his nomination, rendering him ineligible to contest the election.

Citing Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the petitioner argued that if a candidate holds an active contract with the government at the time of nomination, their candidature is deemed invalid.

Advertisement

It claimed that seven contracts held by Sharma were active at the time, but the returning officer failed to scrutinise his nomination and accepted it.

Advertisement
Tags :
#AnuragSharma#ElectionCommissionOfIndia#GovernmentContracts#NominationIneligibility#PILChallenge#RajyaSabhaElection#RepresentationOfThePeopleActelectionlawHimachalPoliticshimachalpradeshhighcourt
Show comments
Advertisement
Advertisement