Archive · 6 Oct 2026
Congress Says Election Chief Betrayed Constitution After Supreme Court Notice
The Supreme Court is looking at a complaint about how India's Election Commission made some decisions.
The complaint asks whether the chief election official made decisions that should have been made by the whole commission.
Congress also accused the chief election official of breaking constitutional rules and criticized changes connected to voter lists.
The Election Commission and the government have been asked to respond within a week.
The judges did not suspend the chief election official for now.
They said commission decisions should be unanimous or supported by a majority.
The Election Commission said disagreements are normal and that its orders follow the law.
The court will consider the issue after receiving responses.
The Supreme Court issued notices to the Election Commission and the Centre, seeking responses within a week on a petition challenging how commission decisions were made.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh accused Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar of violating the Constitution at the behest of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah.
The petition by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh asks whether the CEC exercised powers belonging to the Election Commission as a whole and seeks his suspension while the case is heard.
The court issued no interim order and said Election Commission decisions should be unanimous or made by majority.
Congress cited allegations about Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and reported objections by two commissioners; the Election Commission said differing views are normal and its orders follow legal procedures.
- Who
- The Supreme Court, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, Congress, the Election Commission, and the Centre.
- What
- The Supreme Court issued notices on a petition questioning whether the CEC made decisions without the Election Commission's approval; Congress separately accused him of constitutional violations.
- When
- The reports are dated October 5 and say the court sought responses within a week.
- Where
- New Delhi, India.
- Why
- The petition asks whether the CEC individually exercised powers that belong to the Election Commission as a whole.
Congress and petitioner's claims
Election Commission's response
CEC's authority
Congress and petitioner's claims
The petition asks whether the CEC individually exercised powers belonging to the Election Commission as a whole and seeks a declaration that any such actions were unauthorised.
Election Commission's response
The court said decisions should be unanimous or by majority and presumed that this was how decisions were taken; the Election Commission said its orders had legal sanction and followed statutory procedures.
Commissioners' disagreements
Congress and petitioner's claims
Congress cited reported objections by Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi to decisions and orders concerning electoral-roll revisions.
Election Commission's response
The Election Commission said differing views and observations are normal in institutional deliberations.
Conduct and voter-list decisions
Congress and petitioner's claims
Jairam Ramesh alleged that the CEC violated the law and Constitution, and criticized the Special Intensive Revision and changes to Form 6.
Election Commission's response
The Election Commission maintained that its orders followed established statutory procedures; the court had not issued an interim order.
- Court action
- Notices issued to the Election Commission and the Centre.
- Response deadline
- Within a week.
- Interim order
- The court did not issue an interim order.
- Bench
- Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana.
- Petitioner
- Rakesh Kumar Singh, a resident of Patna.
- Commissioners mentioned
- Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
- Reported objections
- The Indian Express reported that the two commissioners objected on record at least 14 times over 10 months to certain Special Intensive Revision decisions and orders.
