HC Notice on Anurag Sharma election
Shimla, March 26,
The election of Rajya Sabha MP Anurag Sharma from Himachal Pradesh has come under fresh judicial scrutiny, with the Himachal Pradesh High Court issuing notices on a petition that questions his eligibility at the time of filing nomination.
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL), filed by advocate Vinay Sharma, was heard by a Division Bench led by Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice B.C. Negi. Taking cognisance of the plea, the court has directed the Election Commission of India, Union Government, Himachal Pradesh Government, the Returning Officer, and Anurag Sharma to submit their replies by May 21.
Contracts at the centre of dispute
At the heart of the controversy is the allegation that Sharma continued to hold active government contracts at the time of filing his nomination papers for the Rajya Sabha election. The petitioner has argued that such engagements directly attract disqualification under Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Specifically, the plea invokes Section 9A of the Act, which bars individuals from contesting elections if they have subsisting government contracts. According to the petition, Sharma had seven ongoing contracts with government departments when he entered the fray, raising serious questions about the scrutiny process followed by the Returning Officer.
Affidavit disclosure raises questions
The issue gains further weight from Sharma’s own election affidavit, where he disclosed government contracts worth approximately Rs 23.64 crore. Notably, two of these contracts—valued at around Rs 12.58 crore—were reportedly awarded on February 19, 2026, just days before the nomination process began.
The petitioner contends that despite these disclosures, the nomination was accepted without adequately examining whether these contracts constituted a legal disqualification. If proven, the plea argues, the election could be declared void and Sharma’s continuation as a Member of Parliament may also come under threat.
Parallel complaint on property disclosure
In a parallel development, the Bharatiya Janata Party had also approached the Election Commission alleging suppression of property details in Sharma’s affidavit. However, it is understood that a significant portion of the properties flagged in the complaint are registered in the name of Pyare Lal, the MP’s father, which may complicate the claim of concealment.
What lies ahead
The case remains at a preliminary stage, with the High Court yet to examine the merits of the allegations. The responses from the Election Commission and other parties will be crucial in determining whether the contracts in question fall within the ambit of disqualification under the law.
Given the legal and political implications, the outcome of this case could set an important precedent on how contractual engagements with the government are interpreted in election eligibility—especially in states like Himachal Pradesh, where contractor-politician overlaps are not uncommon.
For now, all eyes remain on the High Court proceedings as the matter unfolds in the coming weeks.
About the Author
The HimachalScape Bureau comprises seasoned journalists from Himachal Pradesh with over 25 years of experience in leading media conglomerates such as The Times of India and United News of India. Known for their in-depth regional insights, the team brings credible, research-driven, and balanced reportage on Himachal’s socio-political and developmental landscape.
