Supreme Court adjourns pleas against CEC Gyanesh Kumar to 17 November, allows 10 days for rejoinder

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, 27 October, adjourned the batch of petitions challenging how Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Election Commission of India (ECI) took decisions on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana gave the petitioners 10 days to file a rejoinder to the ECI’s counter-affidavit, which was filed a day earlier. The matter has been listed for 17 November. LiveLaw described that date as tentative.

What the petitions say

The lead case is Rakesh Kumar Singh v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 1246/2026. The lead petitioner is represented by senior advocate Vikas Singh. The petitioners say several ECI decisions on the SIR were taken in the Commission’s name without the agreement of the other two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. According to LiveLaw, the petitions followed an Indian Express report that at least 14 SIR-related decisions had gone ahead despite objections the two commissioners had recorded. The petitioners argue that a multi-member Commission has to decide unanimously or by majority, as required by Section 18 of the 2023 law governing the appointment and service of the CEC and Election Commissioners.

The batch also includes a petition by Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders, Rahul Gandhi v. Election Commission of India, W.P.(C) No. 1351/2026. Notice was issued on that petition on 15 October. There are also pleas by Shailendra Mani Tripathi, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi, Congress leader Digvijaya Singh, TMC MP Dola Sen and others.

What happened in court on 27 October

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Rahul Gandhi and the INDIA bloc leaders. He asked the court to order that the ECI’s file notings and internal communications be preserved. His argument was that whether decisions were unanimous depends on how they were actually made. LiveLaw reported that the Chief Justice replied, “We know everything, we will examine.” The reports did not record any formal order on preserving the records.

Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, for Dola Sen, said the ECI’s own affidavit supported the petitioners. She also alleged that the Commission had altered Form 6, the voter enrolment form, and had wrongly claimed in a press release that the Supreme Court had approved the change. Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the ECI, called these allegations rhetoric. The matter was adjourned after Vikas Singh asked for time to file a rejoinder.

The ECI’s defence

In its counter-affidavit, the ECI says every SIR-related decision was taken unanimously by the full Commission. It also says Form 6 was not amended. The ECI argues that the request to restrain the CEC cannot be entertained, relying on Article 324(5) of the Constitution. That provision protects the CEC by allowing removal only in the manner and on the grounds that apply to a Supreme Court judge.

Background and next steps

The same Bench first heard the matter on 5 October and declined to suspend the CEC ex parte. It issued notice to the Union government, the ECI, the CEC, both Election Commissioners, Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg and DG (IT) Seema Khanna. At that hearing the Bench asked who would conduct elections if the CEC were removed before the respondents were heard. It also said it would not act on newspaper reports alone. When the case returns on 17 November, the court will have the rejoinders before it and could decide whether to look at the Commission’s internal records.

Sources

• LiveLaw: ‘We Will Examine’: Supreme Court adjourns pleas alleging unilateral ECI decisions
• The Pioneer: Supreme Court adjourns pleas against ECI functioning, CEC Gyanesh Kumar
• UNI: SC adjourns pleas challenging ECI functioning
• LiveLaw: Supreme Court refuses to suspend CEC Gyanesh Kumar ex parte, issues notice on plea challenging ECI decisions
• LiveLaw: Supreme Court issues notice on INDIA bloc leaders’ petition against ECI over SIR