Archive · 7 Oct 2026
Supreme Court to Reconsider Split Verdict on Election Appointments Law
India has a law about how its top election officials are appointed.
Some petitions ask the Supreme Court to examine that law.
Two judges disagreed about whether a larger group of judges should hear the case.
They both agreed that the matter should be placed before Chief Justice Surya Kant.
The court will now consider a request to recall one judge’s opinion.
The law’s appointments panel includes the Prime Minister, a nominated Union minister and the Leader of the Opposition.
It does not include the Chief Justice of India.
The article says the Chief Justice had been viewed as a neutral voice in the process.
The Supreme Court will examine a plea seeking recall of Justice Satish Chandra Sharma’s opinion.
The opinion concerned referring challenges to the 2023 appointments law to a larger bench.
Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and Dipankar Datta delivered a split verdict last month.
The judges disagreed on whether the matter should go to a larger bench, but agreed to place it before Chief Justice Surya Kant.
The law excludes the Chief Justice of India from the appointments panel, which includes the Prime Minister, a nominated Union minister and the Leader of the Opposition.
- Who
- The Supreme Court, Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and Dipankar Datta, and Chief Justice Surya Kant.
- What
- The court will examine a plea to recall Justice Sharma’s opinion concerning referral of challenges to the 2023 appointments law to a larger bench.
- When
- The split verdict was delivered last month; the date of the court’s latest move is not stated.
- Where
- The Supreme Court of India.
- Why
- Petitioners challenge the law governing appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners; the plea seeks reconsideration of Justice Sharma’s opinion on referral to a larger bench.
Refer the matter to a larger bench
Do not refer the matter to a larger bench
Whether a larger bench should examine the law
Refer the matter to a larger bench
Justice Satish Chandra Sharma’s opinion supported referring scrutiny of the law to a larger bench.
Do not refer the matter to a larger bench
Justice Dipankar Datta disagreed with referring the matter to a larger bench.
- Law under challenge
- The 2023 law governing appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners.
- Bench
- Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Dipankar Datta.
- Verdict
- The two judges delivered a split verdict last month.
- Point of disagreement
- Whether scrutiny of the law should be referred to a larger bench.
- Agreed next step
- Both judges agreed the matter should be placed before Chief Justice Surya Kant.
- Appointments panel
- The Prime Minister, a nominated Union minister and the Leader of the Opposition.
- Chief Justice's role
- The law excludes the Chief Justice of India from the appointments process.