CEC can be removed only like a Supreme Court judge, ECI tells top court

CEC can be removed only like a Supreme Court judge, ECI tells top court left ECI’s affidavit said a media report on the inner frictions and alleged unilateral or authoritarian functioning of the CEC was hardly evidence in court. File Sushil Kumar Verma Sushil Kumar Verma SUSHIL KUMAR VERMA NEW DELHI, 27/10/2025: Chief Election ommissioner Gyanesh Kumar with Election Commissioner Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr.

Vivek Joshi addressing the press conference in SIR at Vigyan Bhawan, in New Delhi on Monday. Photo: Sushil Kumar Verma / The Hindu A common affidavit filed for the EC, CEC Kumar and Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi say that any attempt to restrain the CEC’s functioning is contrary to the 2023 Act; asserts that Form 6 was not amended; West Bengal CEO’s officers filed appeals against inclusions NEW DELHI The Election Commission of India, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and the two Election Commissioners have filed a joint affidavit highlighting that any attempt to restrain the functioning of the CEC will be contrary to law.

The nearly 250-page document filed in the top court late on Monday (October 26, 2026) said a CEC cannot be removed from office except in the manner and the grounds identical to ousting a Supreme Court judge. The affidavit said a media report on the inner frictions and alleged unilateral or authoritarian functioning of the CEC was hardly evidence in court. Petitions basing itself on media reports should not be even maintainable in court.

INDIA bloc to hold ‘public impeachment proceeding’ of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, says K.C. Venugopal INDIA bloc to hold ‘public impeachment proceeding’ of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, says K.C. Venugopal ‘After this Public Impeachment, we will hold a Dilli Chalo March against Vote Chori culminating at Ramleela Maidan on November 1st, where at least a million concerned citizens will participate,’ said K.C.

Venugopal INDIA bloc to hold ‘public impeachment proceeding’ of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, says K.C. Venugopal storyline 1 Petitioners who have challenged the functioning of the CEC include the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and other INDIA bloc leaders. Other petitioners include Rakesh Kumar Singh and advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi. The affidavit, which shows the CEC to be on the same page as both Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, said the Commission had “neither released nor authorised the release of any internal note or file to any news agency”.

They submitted that the multi-member Commission, in case of any “difference of opinion” would follow the rule of majority to arrive at decisions in accordance with Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. Uttar Pradesh CEO orders reverification of all forms submitted through computer operators Uttar Pradesh CEO orders reverification of all forms submitted through computer operators Action comes after controversy over errors found in electoral rolls published after the Special Intensive Revision Uttar Pradesh CEO orders reverification of all forms submitted through computer operators storyline 1 ‘No unilateral decisions’ The affidavit indicated that there was no room for unilateral decision making in the ECI.

Decisions were vetted at various levels. “Decisions are first sent to one Election Commissioner and then to the other Election Commissioner and then finally to the CEC. Such approved decisions of the EC are duly noted in the files concerned of the EC and bear the signature of the Election Commissioners and the CEC. Thereafter, the decision is notified and implemented by the EC Secretariat,” the affidavit said.

Delhi SIR: 4,263 ‘objections’ missing from Chief Electoral Officer’s website Delhi SIR: 4,263 ‘objections’ missing from Chief Electoral Officer’s website Between August 31 and October 16, 13,462 objections were received but only 9,199 were disclosed in the Form 10 list; an ERO can take action on any objection only seven days after its publication on the Chief Electoral Officer’s website Delhi SIR: 4,263 ‘objections’ missing from Chief Electoral Officer’s website storyline 1 However, the ECI concedes in the affidavit at one point that “in situations involving exigencies and particularly where the immediate issuance of appropriate orders is necessary, when it is not feasible for the CEC or any of the Election Commissioners to be available in person”, an approval of the members of the ECI is obtained through “electronic means” and recorded later in the official file.

“Important functions” were “directly under the Commission as a whole”. “Decisions taken in meetings of the EC or are noted in files bear the signatures of the Election Commissioners and the CEC,” the affidavit said. An office order was issued on July 28, 2026 by an IAS officer of the rank of additional secretary who had been posted on deputation to the ECI pertaining to internal work allocation.

Indirect confirmation The affidavit, however, indirectly confirmed that Mr. Sandhu and Mr. Joshi had written to the Cabinet Secretary about the conduct of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg, following a controversial July 28 order affecting levels of IT oversight over electoral rolls. The order was passed without the knowledge or consensus of the two Election Commissioners.

Cabinet Secretary had copied acknowledgement sent to letters by two ECs to CEC for ‘information’: RTI reply Cabinet Secretary had copied acknowledgement sent to letters by two ECs to CEC for ‘information’: RTI reply Election Commissioners S.S. Sandhu and Vivek Joshi wrote to Cabinet Secretary T.V. Somanathan on July 29 regarding the working of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg Cabinet Secretary had copied acknowledgement sent to letters by two ECs to CEC for ‘information’: RTI reply storyline 1 “On July 29, the two ECs had written separate letters to the Cabinet Secretary in relation to th…