The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear petitions on Monday challenging whether Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar can single-handedly exercise powers that the Constitution vests in the Election Commission as a multi-member body.
Mohana will hear the matter. In response, the CJI directed that the matter be listed the following week. The petition seeks enforcement of the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) collective decision-making mechanism and has also sought a writ in the nature of quo warranto questioning the legal authority under which the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) allegedly acted on behalf of the poll panel. The petition refers to written communications and file notings attributed to Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. The petition also seeks declaratory and mandatory orders to ensure that the ECI follows its collective decision-making process, along with directions for the production and preservation of records related to the decisions under challenge. It has maintained that the exchange of internal objections and written notes is a recognised part of the functioning of a multi-member constitutional body.
The issue was mentioned before the CJI by senior advocate Vikas Singh on September 29. It also cites Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which requires decisions to be taken collectively, with issues where the members do not agree to be resolved through a majority decision. The two commissioners raised at least 14 objections between October 2025 and August 2026 over decisions and actions allegedly taken in the name of the ECI without their consent, according to the plea. The objections listed in the petition concern several issues, including communications and orders allegedly issued without the Election Commission’s approval, the failure to circulate agendas ahead of meetings and record minutes afterwards, foreign travel allegedly undertaken without authorisation, changes to Form 6, access to the electoral roll database, and the filing of appeals before tribunals in West Bengal. The petitioner has sought a declaration that the powers entrusted to the ECI under Article 324 of the Constitution cannot be exercised or presented as decisions of the Commission unless they are carried out in accordance with the constitutional and statutory provisions governing the poll body.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V, according to the cause list available on the Supreme Court’s official website. The plea argues that Article 324 of the Constitution entrusts the “Commission” with the superintendence, direction and control of elections, rather than conferring these powers solely on the Chief Election Commissioner. The plea further highlights concerns allegedly expressed by the two Election Commissioners regarding the “gradual centralisation of the electoral roll database” and changes in the allocation of responsibilities within the poll panel’s IT establishment. The Election Commission, meanwhile, has said that the reported differences among its members should not be viewed as an institutional “rupture”.
