Archive · 5 Oct 2026
Supreme Court Seeks Election Commission Response on Decision-Making Allegations
A petitioner asked India’s top court to look into how the Election Commission made some decisions.
He says the chief election commissioner may have made decisions without the other commissioners.
The court has asked the Election Commission to respond.
It said it cannot decide the case based only on a newspaper report.
The court says decisions should be unanimous or made by a majority.
A newspaper report said two other commissioners raised objections at least 14 times over 10 months.
The Election Commission says questions and suggestions during the draft stage are normal.
It also says the decisions about the SIR schedule were unanimous.
The court may consider action if it finds that the rules were not followed.
The Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission over claims that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar acted unilaterally.
The petition asks whether powers belonging to the full Election Commission were exercised by the CEC alone.
The court said Commission decisions should be unanimous or made by majority, and it needs certified information on how disputed decisions were reached.
The case follows an Indian Express report that two Election Commissioners objected on at least 14 occasions over 10 months.
The Election Commission said draft-stage queries and suggestions were part of its normal process and that decisions on the SIR schedule were unanimous.
- Who
- The Supreme Court of India, the Election Commission, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and petitioner Rakesh Kumar Singh.
- What
- The court issued notice seeking the Election Commission’s response to allegations that the CEC made decisions unilaterally.
- When
- Monday; the article does not specify a date.
- Where
- The Supreme Court of India.
- Why
- A public interest litigation asks whether powers assigned to the full Election Commission were exercised by the CEC alone.
Petitioner's allegations
Election Commission's response
How decisions were made
Petitioner's allegations
The petition asks whether Gyanesh Kumar exercised powers belonging to the Election Commission as a whole without agreement from the other commissioners.
Election Commission's response
The Commission said operational questions, inputs, and suggestions raised during the draft stage were part of its standard process; it said the SIR schedule decisions were unanimous.
Reported objections
Petitioner's allegations
The petitioner cited a newspaper report about objections by the other two commissioners and argued that the Commission had not denied the allegations.
Election Commission's response
The Commission rejected the suggestion that reported objections amounted to institutional dissent over final decisions.
- Court action
- Notice issued to the Election Commission seeking its response.
- Petitioner
- Rakesh Kumar Singh, a Patna resident.
- Chief Election Commissioner
- Gyanesh Kumar.
- Reported objections
- The Indian Express reported objections by two Election Commissioners on at least 14 occasions over 10 months.
- Election Commission position
- It said draft-stage queries and suggestions are part of standard administrative and decision-making processes.
- SIR schedule
- The Election Commission said decisions regarding the SIR exercise schedule were unanimous.
- Court's stated standard
- Commission decisions should be unanimous or made by majority; the court said it needs certified information about the decisions in question.