ECI official defends rejection of Natarajan's RS nomination plea

The Supreme Court dismissed Meenakshi Natarajan's plea against her Rajya Sabha nomination rejection. A former ECI official defended the move, saying she concealed facts. The court cited Article 329(b) for non-interference in the poll process.

Following the Supreme Court's decision to dismiss Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan's plea against the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh, former Election Commission of India (ECI) official Mohd Amin defended the procedural integrity of the decision, noting that it aligns with established electoral law.

ECI Official Defends Rejection

Speaking to ANI, Amin, a former Joint Director and Chief of Protocol at the ECI, explained that the Returning Officer's (RO) action was prompted by a failure to disclose mandatory information. "Under our procedure, Meenakshi Natarajan was issued a nomination form; she was required to make a declaration, but concealed facts," Amin stated. He noted that the RO had served a notice to the candidate seeking a response regarding the omission, but she failed to provide one, leading to the eventual rejection of her papers.

The former EC official clarified that the matter had already been vetted by the poll panel. "She challenged this decision before the Election Commission of India, and the ECI found no fault on the part of our Returning Officer," Amin added.

Supreme Court Cites Non-Interference

Regarding the Supreme Court's refusal to intervene, Amin emphasised that the court acted in accordance with Article 329(b) of the Constitution, which bars judicial interference in an ongoing election process. "Under Article 329(b), any court order regarding the matter would be issued only after the election process has concluded," he observed.

This comes after the Supreme Court on Friday rejected Meenakshi Natarajan's plea challenging the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination papers. "We are not inclined to entertain this petition, and it is hereby dismissed", the court said. The apex court also said that its observation on Natarajan's nomination would not prejudice any election petition that may be instituted before the jurisdictional High Court.

Natarajan Alleges EC is 'Compromised'

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Natarajan, argued that in the case cited against her, charges had not been framed, which is a requirement under the Representation of the People's Act (RoP) for rejecting a nomination.

Reacting to the Supreme Court's decision, Natarajan said, "We all know the Election Commission's stance. I do not wish to make any comment regarding the Supreme Court."

"I have been saying from day one that the Election Commission is deeply compromised, and today this has been proven once again. When the lawyer for the State of Madhya Pradesh stands up, this isn't a matter concerning the State of Madhya Pradesh. We weren't fighting against the states; we were talking about the Election Commission. We were highlighting how the Returning Officer was compromised, and they have been exposed before the public," the Congress leader said. (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)