Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh was rejected over alleged non-disclosure in her election affidavit, triggering a legal battle. The Supreme Court declined to intervene, holding that election disputes arising after the poll process begins must be challenged through the statutory election petition route.
Today, On 11th June , The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear on Friday a petition filed by Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan challenging the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh. Natarajan has sought judicial intervention against the decision, bringing the nomination dispute before the apex court for urgent consideration.
Senior Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan has moved the Supreme Court challenging the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh. The plea raises important questions on candidate disclosure obligations, election transparency, pending court proceedings, and the legality of the Returning Officer’s decision.
The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a student’s plea challenging her nomination rejection for the JNUSU elections due to the age limit rule barring candidates over 25. The bench upheld the existing regulation and emphasized compliance with established election rules, indicating no legal grounds for exception.
On Wednesday(24th July), The Himachal Pradesh High Court issued a notice to BJP MP Kangana Ranaut over a petition challenging her election victory. The petitioner, Layak Ram Negi, claims his nomination papers were unjustly rejected, leading to Ranaut’s unchallenged win. Ranaut has been directed to respond by August 21. This notice signals a serious examination of the petition.
![[LS Election 2024] SC Refuses to Entertain Independent Candidate's Plea against Rejection of Nomination](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-35-4.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court refused to entertain an independent candidate’s plea against the rejection of his nomination for the upcoming elections. The candidate was advised to pursue alternative legal remedies, as the Court stated that such matters should be challenged through an election petition rather than at a pre-poll stage. The petition was ultimately dismissed.
