Jump to content

Talk:Gujarat Legislative Assembly

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New MLA 2012 list

[edit]

Please First edit this list for new membera elected in 2012 then move it to article page.--Nizil (talk) 13:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Work done. New list added. --Nizil (talk) 23:24, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

members List correction

[edit]

At 'Constituencies and current members List' there was double entry at sr.74 & 138. Sr.138 is corrected. (Ref: List of members on gujaratassembly.gov.in)--Ashok modhvadia (talk) 13:10, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thank you Ashokbhai.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:23, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nice observation. Well done,sir.--Nizil (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two more seats are vacant now as Vitthal Radadia and his son resigns. [1] --Nizil (talk) 11:16, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Gujarat High Court on Friday invalidated the election of Bharatiya Janata Party MLA Pabubha Manek from the Dwarka Assembly constituency in 2017 and ordered a bye-poll in the seat, The Hindu reported.

Manek’s victory had been challenged by Congress leader Ahir Meramanbhai Marakhibhai on grounds that he had not filled his nomination accurately. A candidate from Gujarat’s Dwarka seat in 2017, Marakhibhai said in his petition pointed out that Manek had not filled in the name and number of his constituency in the form. Instead, that field contained the name of Manek’s proposer (who recommends a candidate’s name).

The court, however, dismissed Marakhibhai’s contention that he should be declared as the MLA from that seat inside after Manek’s election is terminated, said Bar & Bench.

Manek had contended that the omission, though undeniable, did not qualify as a defect of “substantial character”. However, Justice Paresh Upadhyay held that “information regarding the name and number of the Assembly Constituency from where the candidate is to contest the election, cannot be said to be an irrelevant and/or insignificant information...It is very vital information.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The judge ruled that the case is fit for disqualification under the “improper acceptance of any nomination” clause of the Section 100 of the People of Representation Act, 1951, which lays out the grounds for declaring an election as void. Babujidhirechalna (talk) 11:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]