Court Says Election Commission Decisions Must Follow Unanimous or Majority Process; Questions Raised Over Form 6 Changes
NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 6: The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Union Government on petitions challenging the manner in which certain decisions of the poll panel were allegedly taken without the concurrence of all members of the Commission.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana issued notices after hearing submissions made by senior advocate Vikas Singh. The respondents have been directed to file their responses within a week.
The petitions raise important questions concerning the constitutional and statutory functioning of the Election Commission, particularly whether the Chief Election Commissioner can independently exercise powers vested in the Commission as a collective constitutional body.
SC Examines Collective Decision-Making Mechanism
During the hearing, the Supreme Court observed that decisions of the Election Commission are required to be taken either unanimously or by majority.
The Bench indicated that if examination of the official records establishes that any decision was taken without the legally required approval of the Commission, the Court could examine its validity and consider appropriate consequential action.
The Court said it would examine the relevant records before reaching any conclusion on the allegations.
Petition Challenges Alleged Individual Exercise of CEC Powers
A petition filed by Rakesh Kumar Singh of Patna has questioned whether Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar could individually exercise powers that are legally vested in the Election Commission.
The petitioner has sought directions concerning the manner in which the Commission conducts its business and has urged that decisions be taken through the prescribed process involving the other Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
A connected petition filed by Shailendra Mani Tripathi has also been tagged with the proceedings.
The connected plea challenges certain decisions, guidelines and alleged software-related changes concerning electoral rolls, arguing that the prescribed process for collective decision-making was not followed.
Supreme Court Clarifies Position on Form 6
The Bench also clarified during the proceedings that the Supreme Court had not approved any modification to Form 6.
Form 6 is used by eligible citizens seeking inclusion of their names in the electoral rolls.
The Court indicated that once the relevant records are placed before it, it would examine who made the alleged changes, under what authority and through what procedure.
The issue has emerged in connection with the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
One of the petitions alleges that additional requirements relating to ancestral details and linkage with an earlier SIR were introduced through the Election Commission’s software without following the prescribed statutory procedure for modifying the electoral form.
ECI’s Stand on Institutional Deliberations
The matter also relates to reports concerning differences or objections allegedly raised by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi over certain decisions and orders connected with the electoral-roll revision exercise.
The Election Commission has maintained that differences of opinion and observations can form part of institutional deliberations and has asserted that its orders have been issued in accordance with the applicable statutory framework and procedures.
SC Declines Immediate Restraint on CEC
The Supreme Court did not immediately grant the petitioners’ request for an interim restraint on the Chief Election Commissioner.
The Bench observed that such a step could not be based solely on newspaper reports and that the Court would first require official records and responses from the Election Commission and the Centre.
The Court also considered the implications of any order affecting the functioning of the Election Commission, including the broader question of how the constitutional body would continue to discharge its responsibilities.
Legality of Poll Panel Decisions Under Examination
The proceedings will now focus on the constitutional and statutory framework governing decision-making within the Election Commission.
The Supreme Court has indicated that if the official material establishes that a decision was taken without the required unanimous or majority approval, its legal validity could be examined by the Court.
With notices issued to the Election Commission of India and the Union Government, the matter is expected to come up again after the responses and relevant records are placed before the Bench.KNC)
