3 hrs ago
Supreme Court Splits Over Larger Bench For CEC Law
The Supreme Court considered challenges to a 2023 law about choosing election officials.
The law leaves the Chief Justice of India out of the group that selects the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners.
Justice Dipankar Datta said the case should not be sent to a larger bench.
Justice Satish Chandra Sharma disagreed with him.
This created a split decision between the two judges.
Both judges agreed that the case should go to Chief Justice Surya Kant.
He will consider forming a bench with the right number of judges to hear it.
The judges also asked him to explore creating a permanent five-judge bench for constitutional questions.
Justice Dipankar Datta declined to refer challenges to the 2023 law to a larger bench.
Justice Satish Chandra Sharma disagreed with Justice Datta on the referral question.
The law excludes the Chief Justice of India from the panel selecting the CEC and ECs.
Both judges directed that the pleas be placed before CJI Surya Kant for further bench constitution.
The bench asked the CJI to consider a permanent five-judge bench for constitutional issues.
- Who
- Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma issued differing views, while Chief Justice Surya Kant will consider the next bench.
- What
- The Supreme Court gave a split verdict on whether challenges to a 2023 election-commissioner appointment law should go to a larger bench.
- Where
- The Supreme Court in New Delhi.
- When
- Wednesday.
- Why
- The pleas challenge the law's constitutional validity, particularly its exclusion of the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel.
Larger-Bench Referral
No Larger-Bench Referral
Whether the pleas require a five-judge bench
Larger-Bench Referral
Justice Satish Chandra Sharma differed from Justice Datta on the request to refer the pleas to a larger bench, reflecting support for a different approach to the referral question.
No Larger-Bench Referral
Justice Dipankar Datta rejected the Centre's submission that the pleas raised seminal constitutional questions requiring referral to a five-judge Constitution bench.
Handling the case after the split
Larger-Bench Referral
The differing opinion means the referral issue was not resolved unanimously and the matter must be placed before the CJI.
No Larger-Bench Referral
Justice Datta's position was not to refer the pleas to a larger bench, although both judges agreed that the CJI should constitute a bench of appropriate strength.
Key facts
- Disputed law
- The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
- Main issue
- Whether challenges to the law should be referred to a larger bench.
- Selection panel
- The law excludes the Chief Justice of India from the panel selecting the CEC and ECs.
- Justice Dipankar Datta
- Declined to refer the pleas to a larger bench.
- Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
- Disagreed with Justice Datta's view.
- Next step
- The pleas will be placed before CJI Surya Kant for constitution of a bench of appropriate strength.
- Earlier ruling
- On March 2, 2023, a five-judge Constitution bench provided for a panel comprising the prime minister, the Lok Sabha Opposition leader and the CJI.
Sources
Related news
Supreme Court Split Over Larger Bench For Poll Body Case
Supreme Court Split Over Election Commissioner Appointment Law Reference
Supreme Court Split Over Election Commissioner Appointment Law
Justice Datta Defends Collegium, Criticises Centre’s Selective Approvals
Former CEC Questions Legality of EC Decisions Without Majority
TMC revives impeachment push against CEC amid Election Commission dissent
Supreme Court Seeks Centre Response on Muslim Inheritance Rules
Congress Accuses Gyanesh Kumar of Acting With Government Support
