Opposition parties have stepped up demands for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar following reports of disagreements within the Election Commission of India (ECI) over decisions connected with the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The issue gained political attention after reports that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections over several decisions taken by the poll panel.
According to a report published by The Indian Express, Sandhu and Joshi recorded objections on multiple occasions over a period of several months. Their concerns reportedly covered issues including the registration of new voters, deletion and restoration of names from electoral rolls, access to voter databases, and the functioning of election-related information technology systems.
One issue involved changes to Form 6, which is used by eligible citizens to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll. The report said the revised form included questions connected with previous SIR electoral rolls. Sandhu reportedly objected to the change, while Joshi had also raised concerns about whether such a modification could be made without corresponding changes to the applicable rules.
Another area of concern involved access to the electoral-roll database. The two Election Commissioners reportedly raised questions about the centralisation of access to voter-roll systems and whether statutory officials at the state and constituency levels continued to have the access required to perform their responsibilities.
The reported differences also included developments in West Bengal, where questions were raised concerning appeals filed in connection with decisions involving voters during the SIR process. The reported objections sought clarification regarding who had authorised the filing of such appeals and whether the relevant Election Commission officials had been informed.
The investigation also highlighted an issue in Goa, where election officials reportedly found 97 voters eligible after considering documents submitted during the SIR process. However, the relevant software reportedly did not initially provide a mechanism for recording the decisions before the final electoral-roll publication deadline.
The developments have prompted strong reactions from opposition parties. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge has called for action concerning the pending process seeking the removal of the CEC, while other opposition leaders have demanded greater scrutiny of the Election Commission’s functioning.
Uddhav Thackeray has also called for Gyanesh Kumar’s removal and demanded an investigation into the reported issues. Other opposition leaders have called for greater scrutiny of the SIR process, particularly regarding voter verification and changes to electoral rolls.
These statements represent political demands and allegations by opposition parties and should be distinguished from established findings by a court or other competent authority.
The Election Commission, however, has disputed the interpretation that the reported objections demonstrate a breakdown in decision-making. Sources within the ECI have maintained that decisions of the Commission, including those concerning SIR, were taken through the Commission’s prescribed decision-making process.
The legal framework governing the Election Commission is also central to the controversy. The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023 provides a framework for the functioning and decision-making of the Commission. Where Commissioners differ in opinion, the law provides for decisions according to the majority view.
The controversy comes amid the wider Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, which involves verification and revision of voter lists. The exercise has generated political and legal debate over voter verification, deletion of names, restoration of eligible voters, and transparency in electoral-roll procedures.
The latest developments have therefore placed the functioning of the Election Commission, the administration of electoral rolls, and safeguards surrounding voter registration under renewed public scrutiny. While opposition parties are seeking action against CEC Gyanesh Kumar, the Election Commission maintains that its decisions have been taken through the prescribed process. Any determination regarding individual responsibility or possible legal violations would depend on the relevant constitutional, statutory or judicial processes.
Be First to Comment