Supreme Court To Hear Pleas Against CEC Gyanesh Kumar, ECI's SIR Decisions Today

News india Supreme Court To Hear Pleas Against CEC Gyanesh Kumar, ECI's SIR Decisions Today

Last Updated:October 27, 2026, 07:22 IST

The ECI has sought dismissal of the petitions, describing the allegations as "misconceived" and arguing that they are based entirely on a single newspaper report.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Tuesday petitions challenging Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and decisions taken by the Election Commission of India (ECI) during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

In its counter affidavit filed before the apex court, the poll panel has defended the SIR exercise, maintaining that all three orders issued in June 2025, October 2025 and May 2026 were approved unanimously by the Commission’s three members – the CEC and the two Election Commissioners.

The ECI has sought dismissal of the petitions, describing the allegations as “misconceived" and arguing that they are based entirely on a single newspaper report.

“The attempt to make aspersions against the Election Commission is unfortunate," the affidavit said.

The response comes after a report by The Indian Express on September 25 claimed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had objected on record at least 14 times over 10 months to SIR-related decisions and orders they said were issued without their knowledge or recommendation. The report triggered protests by Opposition parties demanding the removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar.

ECI Says Form 6 Was Not Amended

Rejecting allegations that Form 6, the statutory application form for inclusion in electoral rolls, had been changed, the Commission said the declaration required during the SIR was a separate document introduced under the revision orders and did not form part of Form 6.

However, the ECI acknowledged that the way the declaration was displayed on its online platform “could be construed as though an amendment of Form 6 had been made".

The Commission said the declaration had been merged into the online Form 6 page to allow applicants to complete the process using a single OTP and e-signature.

Following deliberations, the Electoral Rolls Division decided on October 21 to split online applications into two parts, in line with the procedure followed for physical forms.

ECI Explains Decision-Making Process

The poll panel said suggestions, observations or queries raised by individual commissioners during the processing of files do not constitute decisions of the Commission.

It explained that files are routed first to one Election Commissioner, then to the other, and finally to the CEC. In urgent cases, approvals may be obtained electronically and recorded on file subsequently, it said.

The affidavit also addressed questions surrounding an office order on internal work allocation issued on July 28 by an IAS officer of Additional Secretary rank posted on deputation to the Commission.

According to the ECI, both Election Commissioners wrote to the Cabinet Secretary the following day regarding the order and the officer’s conduct. The order “was never implemented" following a joint direction issued by the two commissioners on July 30.

Hearings For Unmapped Voters To Be Exceptional

On the process for voters whose details could not be mapped during the SIR, the Commission said Booth Level Officers (BLOs) would visit their homes to collect documents, sparing them the need to appear in person for hearings.

The decision was taken unanimously on September 26, the affidavit said, adding that hearings would be held only in exceptional cases and preferably online.

On concerns over the ECINet portal, the poll panel said no name is added, deleted or modified except by an order of the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO).

A committee headed by a senior Deputy Election Commissioner, with independent experts from IIT Bombay and IISc Bengaluru, was constituted on October 14 to examine the portal’s compliance with the law, it added.

ECI Responds To West Bengal, Goa Concerns

Addressing appeals against the inclusion of voters in West Bengal’s electoral rolls, the Commission said these were filed by officers of the state Chief Electoral Officer’s office acting as statutory authorities in accordance with Supreme Court orders.

“These matters were not brought to the Commission," the affidavit said.

On Goa, the ECI said that of 97 voters described as having been left out, 88 had already been enrolled, six were abroad and three held Portuguese passports.

The Commission also maintained that it had “neither released nor authorised the release of any internal note/ file to any news agency".

Plea To Restrain CEC Not Maintainable: ECI

The poll panel questioned the maintainability of pleas seeking action against or restrictions on the CEC, citing Article 324(5) of the Constitution, which provides that the CEC can be removed only in the manner prescribed for a Supreme Court judge.

It also rejected renewed challenges to electronic voting machines (EVMs), stating that similar contentions had been turned down by the Supreme Court on several occasions.

The ECI said it had filed a short reply due to the Dussehra vacation and sought liberty to submit a detailed, paragraph-wise response.

The court will hear the matter on Tuesday.

About the Author

Prisha Vibhavari

Prisha is the Chief Sub-Editor at News18.com, with more than 10 years of experience in national and international news. She specialises in editorial leadership, sharp news judgment, and high-impact st...Read More

Read More