Supreme Court to Address Legal Challenge to Chief Election Commissioner's Authority

The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear petitions today that challenge the authority of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar to act unilaterally in matters traditionally governed by the full Election Commission of India (ECI).

This legal scrutiny comes as a specific bench, which includes Chief Justice of India Surya Kant alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, prepares to deliberate on the matter. The petitions were initially presented to the CJI by senior advocate Vikas Singh on September 29, leading to the designation of today for the hearing.

The core issue raised in the petitions revolves around the constitutional mandate that the ECI should operate as a collective entity. The petitioners argue that Article 324 of the Indian Constitution bestows the responsibility of overseeing elections to the 'Commission' as a whole, rather than granting unilateral power to the individual CEC.

Further supporting their argument, the petition cites Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which clearly outlines that decisions should be made collectively. It emphasizes that in instances where consensus cannot be reached, matters must be resolved by a majority vote of the Commissioners.

According to the filings, the petitioners have presented evidence of at least 14 objections raised by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi between October 2025 and August 2026. These objections pertain to decisions made in the name of the ECI without the necessary approvals from all Commissioners, including critical issues related to the electoral roll and foreign travel of Commission officials.

The petition details various complaints concerning the issuance of communications and orders without the necessary agreements within the Commission and the lack of formal minutes from meetings. Additionally, the petition points to unexplained changes in official documentation and alleged centralization of data handling processes, sparking further concern among the Commissioners about the operational transparency of the ECI.

The plaintiffs are seeking a judicial pronouncement that clarifies that powers under Article 324 must be executed in line with the established constitutional and statutory guidelines. They are also requesting that the Supreme Court mandate adherence to the collective governance structure of the ECI, alongside the preservation of records relevant to the contested decisions.

In response, the ECI has stated that the differences among the Commissioners do not signify a fundamental disruption within the institution. It maintains that internal disagreements and written communications are routine and acceptable aspects of functioning within a multi-member constitutional entity.

Source

Original IANS report

Edited with AI assistance.

Featured image: AI-generated representative image.