- Supreme Court's interim rejection of Chief Election Commissioner Dyanesh Kumar's suspension
- Dyanesh Kumar accused of taking 14 decisions in SIR context without the consent of two other commissioners
- Chief Justice Suryakant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Nya. V. Mohana's bench hearing
Supreme Court Refuses Stay On CEC Gyanesh Kumar SIR Case: The Supreme Court refused to grant an interim order on a petition filed against the Chief Election Commissioner of the Central Election Commission, Gyanesh Kumar. The Nirwala court has said that suspension cannot be ordered on the basis of media reports. A petition was filed against him for allegedly taking around 14 decisions related to SIR without the consent of two other Election Commissioners.
A hearing on this petition was held in the Supreme Court today. This time the court has refused to order on this petition. But at the same time, the Commission has also sought a reply regarding these allegations. If these decisions are found to have been taken without consent, they can be annulled, the court also said.
CJP Leaders Claim Arrest Plan: Planning to arrest CJP leaders including Abhijeet, Ashutosh, Sourav;
Chief Justice of India Suryakant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana's bench heard the petition regarding the Chief Election Commissioner. On this petition, Central Government, Election Commission, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, Election Commissioner Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Notices have been issued to Vivek Joshi, Deputy Election Commissioner Manish Garg and DG (IT) Seema Khanna.
What are the arguments against Gyanesh Kumar?
During the hearing, the petitioners urged the Chief Election Commissioner to issue an interim order of immediate suspension. Senior lawyer Vikas Singh said, “We are facing a serious situation. This can shake the foundations of our democracy. Earlier there was a certain respect for the Election Commission. But the situation today is that the Chief Election Commissioner is acting completely against the statutory provisions. … An interim order is necessary, otherwise the entire country will burn.” Vikas Singh expressed such fear.
Important points of the Supreme Court in this case
Chief Justice Suryakant said that the Supreme Court has not approved any revised version of Form 6 used for inclusion of names in electoral roll during SIR.
If the Chief Election Commissioner is suspended, who will manage the Election Commission and conduct the elections, the bench asked. The bench noted that it is necessary to take responses from the parties before passing any order.
The law is binding and the court expects it to be followed. If the law is found to be violated, the court can annul the relevant decision.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi also raised the question whether such an order can be passed without hearing the defendants.
He said that if the record shows that a decision was not reached unanimously, the court can stay the decision and declare it ultra vires. , it would not be fair to conclude without hearing the respondents on the sole ground that all the decisions were taken unilaterally.
Supreme Court: 'Even at 10 pm to every woman…', Supreme Court landmark decision on rape cases
What is the matter?
The court was hearing petitions filed against the Election Commission regarding Special In-depth Scrutiny of Electoral Roll (SIR). The petition had argued that the Election Commission, despite being a multi-member constitutional body, was exercising its powers without following the collective decision-making process required by law.
According to an English newspaper report, the controversy arose after Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi formally objected at least 14 times over a 10-month period to decisions related to electoral rolls, voter registration and the commission's technology system.