Stories
Can The Supreme Court Suspend Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar? The Constitutional Dilemma
- •The Supreme Court declined an immediate interim plea seeking the suspension of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over allegations of unilateral decision-making.
- •A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant issued notices to the Election Commission of India and the commissioners, choosing judicial scrutiny over immediate suspension.
- •The petitioner argues that powers meant for the multi-member Election Commission were exercised individually by the CEC, violating the collegial framework.
- •Article 324 of the Constitution provides strict protections for the CEC, stating they can only be removed in the same manner as a Supreme Court judge.
- •The court noted a lack of concrete evidence beyond news reports and emphasized that the Election Commission must respond to the allegations.
Key Questions Answered
The Supreme Court chose scrutiny over suspension because removing or temporarily restraining the head of a constitutional body is extraordinarily unusual and legally complex. Furthermore, the bench noted an evidentiary problem, pointing out that the petitioners were relying on news reports rather than verified facts at this stage.
Article 324 of the Constitution vests election superintendence in the multi-member Election Commission rather than solely in the CEC. Additionally, Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, dictates that the Commission must transact business unanimously where possible, or settle differences by majority vote.
The petition alleges that CEC Gyanesh Kumar unilaterally exercised powers meant for the multi-member Commission without proper collective consensus. It highlights objections raised by other commissioners regarding electoral rolls, the Special Intensive Revision, and unauthorized modifications to Form 6.
