In a concerted effort to thwart the candidacies of National Democratic Alliance (NDA) contestants, various political parties, including DMK, All India Anna Dravidian Progressive Federation (AIADMK), and Naam Tamizhar Katchi (NTK), came together. They raised objections against the nomination papers of several candidates, notably Annamalai, causing apprehension among BJP leaders and supporters. Despite the united opposition’s efforts, the Returning Officer ultimately ruled in favour of Annamalai’s nomination papers, stating they were in order.
The opposition’s move to contest the nominations extended beyond Annamalai, reflecting a broader anxiety towards NDA allies contesting in the upcoming polls. This collective effort underscores the opposition’s fear of BJP’s growing influence and its prospects of success in the impending elections.
March 27 marked the deadline for filing nominations, with March 30 set as the last date for withdrawal. Tamil Nadu gears up for polling in a single phase on April 19. The AIADMK, on March 28, petitioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) to invalidate Annamalai’s nomination filed from Coimbatore, citing technical discrepancies such as the use of a court fee stamp paper instead of a non-judicial stamp paper.
Additionally, DMK raised concerns about Annamalai’s asset declaration in his affidavit, accusing him of understating his assets. Furthermore, objections were raised regarding the number of individuals accompanying Annamalai while filing his nomination papers, violating the Election Commission’s code of conduct.
Despite objections from NTK representatives regarding the format of Annamalai’s nomination papers, the District Election Officer cum District Collector, Kranthi Kumar Rai, accepted them. However, protests ensued, with NTK candidate Kalamani Jegannathan staging a demonstration outside the collectorate.
In response to the opposition’s allegations, Annamalai attributed the confusion to a minor discrepancy between Indian court fee stamp paper and Indian non-judicial stamp paper.
Meanwhile, DMK filed a formal complaint with the ECI, reiterating the violation of guidelines regarding the number of accompanying individuals during the nomination filing process. AIADMK candidate Singai G. Ramachandran announced plans to escalate the matter to the court, alleging that the District Election Officer had updated Annamalai’s affidavit after the submission of complaints.
In other constituencies, similar objections arose. In Theni, objections were raised against Dhinakaran’s nominations, leading to a temporary withholding until resolved. Likewise, in Salem, DMK candidate TM Selvaganapathi’s nominations faced hurdles due to objections regarding multiple voter IDs, although they were later accepted after clarification.
The election atmosphere was tense in Thoothukudi, with AIADMK demanding the rejection of DMK candidate Kanimozhi’s nomination due to legal issues. At the same time, DMK sought the rejection of AIADMK candidate Sivasami Velumani’s papers for alleged false information about his educational qualifications.
In Mayiladuthurai, NTK candidate Kaliyammal sought the rejection of Congress candidate Advocate Sudha Ramakrishnan’s nomination, citing non-filing of income tax returns for seven fiscal years, a demand that the Returning Officer ultimately dismissed.
The ongoing objections and controversies surrounding nominations underscore the intense political landscape in Tamil Nadu as parties vie for electoral success in the upcoming polls.
Comments