All SIR Orders Were Unanimous, Form 6 Unchanged, Urgent Approvals Taken Electronically: ECI Tells Supreme Court
by Himanshu · KalingaTVAdvertisement
New Delhi: The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Monday rejected allegations that Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar had taken unilateral decisions regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, informing the Supreme Court that all three SIR orders were unanimously approved by the Commission.
In a counter-affidavit filed before the apex court, the poll body maintained that the orders issued on June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026, were collective decisions of the three-member Commission.
The ECI further stated that the petition challenging the functioning of Gyanesh Kumar was based entirely on a single newspaper report and lacked independent verification of the allegations.
The affidavit, filed through Deputy Election Commissioner Bhanu Prakash Yeturu, was unanimously approved by CEC Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
The controversy arose following a media report alleging that the two Election Commissioners had raised objections on multiple occasions to decisions taken in the name of the Commission without their approval.
However, the ECI clarified that observations, suggestions and queries recorded by individual commissioners during the processing of official files did not constitute final decisions of the Commission.
It maintained that decisions were taken after considering the views of all three members, in accordance with Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023.
Clarification on Form 6
The Election Commission also rejected allegations that it had illegally amended Form 6, which is used for enrolling new voters.
Advertisement
It clarified that Form 6 could only be amended by the Central government and that the additional declaration introduced during the SIR exercise was a separate document.
The declaration allows applicants to establish links with their own or their parents’ or grandparents’ names in previous electoral rolls, potentially reducing the requirement for additional documents.
The Commission acknowledged that the online presentation of the declaration could have created confusion regarding changes to Form 6. It said the online application process would separate Form 6 and the SIR declaration from October 21, 2026.
Plea against CEC Not Maintainable, Says ECI
The poll body also opposed the petition seeking to restrain Gyanesh Kumar from functioning as Chief Election Commissioner.
Citing Article 324(5) of the Constitution, the ECI argued that the CEC could be removed only through a process similar to that applicable to a Supreme Court judge.
It maintained that restraining the CEC from performing his duties would interfere with the statutory functioning and decision-making process of the Commission.
The ECI urged the Supreme Court to reject the petition, arguing that the allegations were misconceived and the reliefs sought were legally unsustainable.
The matter is scheduled to be heard by a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Tuesday, October 27.
Also read: Tiger Shroff firing case: Mumbai Court remands four accused to police custody till October 28
Advertisement