New Delhi, October 5, 2026 (Yes Punjab News)
The Supreme Court is set to hear on Monday a batch of petitions challenging the manner in which Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has allegedly exercised powers vested in the multi-member Election Commission of India (ECI).
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana is scheduled to take up the matter, according to the Supreme Court’s cause list.
The petitions raise questions over whether decisions taken in the name of the ECI can be exercised or represented by the CEC without the concurrence of the other Election Commissioners, particularly in matters connected with the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
One of the pleas seeks enforcement of the collective decision-making mechanism governing the poll panel and a writ in the nature of quo warranto concerning the authority under which the CEC allegedly acted on behalf of the Commission.
The petitioners have relied on Article 324 of the Constitution, which vests the superintendence, direction and control of elections in the “Commission”, as well as Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which provides for collective decision-making and majority resolution where members do not agree.
The pleas cite written communications and file notings attributed to Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, alleging that they raised objections on at least 14 occasions between October 2025 and August 2026 over decisions and steps purportedly taken in the name of the ECI without their approval.
Among the issues cited are alleged changes to Form 6, access and control of electoral-roll databases, appeals concerning voter rolls in West Bengal, absence of agendas and minutes for meetings, foreign travel and changes in the functioning of the poll panel’s IT establishment.
The petitions also raise concerns over what they describe as the gradual centralisation of the electoral-roll database.
Separately, petitions before the court seek suspension of Kumar pending adjudication and challenge decisions, guidelines and software changes allegedly introduced without the concurrence of the other two Election Commissioners.
The Election Commission, however, has rejected the suggestion of an institutional rupture, maintaining that differences of opinion, observations and written notes are part of deliberations within a multi-member constitutional body. The poll panel has also maintained that its decisions were taken in accordance with established procedures.
The matter was mentioned before CJI Surya Kant on September 29 by senior advocate Vikas Singh, following which the Bench directed that it be listed the following week.
The Supreme Court’s hearing will determine how it proceeds with the petitions and the issues raised concerning the statutory and constitutional framework governing the functioning of the Election Commission. The allegations in the pleas remain matters for judicial consideration, with no finding on their merits at this stage.
FOLLOW NOW
