Archive · 5 Oct 2026
Supreme Court Seeks Replies Over Gyanesh Kumar's Poll Panel Decisions
The Supreme Court is asking the Election Commission and the government to explain how some decisions were made.
A petition says that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar may have acted without agreement from two other commissioners.
The court said decisions should be made unanimously or by majority.
It also said it assumes decisions follow the law unless evidence shows otherwise.
The judges said they would not decide the case just because of a newspaper report.
They will review the responses before deciding what to do.
The Election Commission says that commissioners can have different views and that its orders follow the rules.
The petition also asks the court to suspend Kumar while it considers the case.
The Supreme Court asked the Election Commission and the Centre to respond within a week to a plea challenging decisions allegedly made without two commissioners' approval.
The bench said Election Commission decisions must be unanimous or by majority and presumed they were being taken according to law.
The court said it would annul any Election Commission decision found unlawful and would not rule solely on a newspaper report.
The plea seeks to determine whether Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar exercised powers belonging to the full commission and asks for his suspension pending the case.
The Election Commission said differing views are normal and its orders have legal sanction and follow statutory procedures.
- Who
- The Supreme Court, the Election Commission, the Centre, and a petitioner, Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh; the petition concerns Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
- What
- The court issued notice seeking responses to a plea challenging whether decisions were made without the approval of two Election Commissioners.
- When
- On Monday; responses were requested within a week.
- Where
- India's Supreme Court.
- Why
- The plea asks whether the Chief Election Commissioner exercised powers belonging to the full Election Commission, amid reports of commissioners objecting to decisions related to electoral-roll revision.
Petitioners
Election Commission
Authority for commission decisions
Petitioners
The plea asks the court to determine whether Gyanesh Kumar individually exercised powers belonging to the Election Commission as a whole, and to declare any such actions unauthorised.
Election Commission
The Election Commission says its orders have full legal sanction and follow established statutory procedures; it also says differing views are a normal part of institutional deliberations.
Alleged decisions without colleagues' approval
Petitioners
The plea challenges decisions, guidelines and software changes allegedly made without the concurrence of Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi; it seeks Kumar's suspension pending the case.
Election Commission
The commission has defended its orders, while the Supreme Court said it would seek the commission's response and would not decide on the basis of a newspaper report alone.
- Response deadline
- Within a week
- Bench
- Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana
- Petitioner
- Rakesh Kumar Singh, a Patna resident
- Commissioners named
- Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi
- Alleged objections
- A cited Indian Express report said the two commissioners objected on record at least 14 times over 10 months to SIR-related decisions or orders.
- Court's stated approach
- Election Commission decisions must be unanimous or by majority; unlawful decisions may be annulled.
- Election Commission's position
- It said differing views are normal and its orders carry legal sanction and follow statutory procedures.
- Form 6
- The Chief Justice said the modified Form 6 had not been approved by the Supreme Court.
