The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list for hearing next week a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking action against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. The petition also challenges decisions allegedly taken without the concurrence of Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
The matter gained attention after reports said the two Election Commissioners had written to the Cabinet Secretary objecting to certain decisions, including aspects of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. It was also reported that they flagged the inclusion of some SIR-related details in Form 6 as being contrary to rules. The Election Commission, however, has stated that all decisions were taken unanimously.
The PIL, filed by Rakesh Kumar Singh of Patna, argues that in a multi-member Election Commission, decisions must be taken unanimously or by majority, and raises doubts about whether that process is being followed. It seeks an interim restraint on the CEC exercising powers until the case is finally decided and asks for his suspension from the post.
The petition further contends that under Article 324(1), the authority to conduct and control elections vests in the Election Commission as a collective body, not in the CEC alone. It asks the court to examine whether the CEC exercised powers unlawfully, declare such actions invalid, and direct that the Commission’s work be carried out based on the consensus of the other two Election Commissioners.
Separately, the report said Maharashtra Chief Electoral Officer S. Chokkalingam wrote to the Election Commission on September 24 seeking greater decision-making powers for Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) in resolving discrepancies in voter lists, including notices generated through the ‘ECI Net’ software. The Election Commission is stated to have accepted these requests.
