New Delhi, October 5, 2026 – The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear two important public interest litigations (PILs) today that question the functioning of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and the legality of decisions linked to the nationwide Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana will examine the petitions. The matters were listed after senior advocate Vikas Singh sought an early hearing, arguing that the issues raise serious constitutional questions about collective decision-making within the Election Commission of India (ECI).
The petitions follow reports that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally recorded objections on at least 14 occasions between October 2025 and August 2026. The objections related to various decisions and orders concerning the SIR exercise, including changes to Form 6 (the application form for inclusion in electoral rolls), management of the ERONet/ECINet voter database, and the filing of appeals in certain states. The commissioners reportedly stated that some decisions were issued without their knowledge or recommendation
A declaration that powers under Article 324 of the Constitution vest in the Election Commission as a multi-member body and cannot be exercised unilaterally by the CEC.
Restraint on Gyanesh Kumar from functioning as CEC pending the hearing.
Directions that Commission business be transacted by the other two Election Commissioners in the interim.
Restoration of the original Form 6.
Petitioners argue that Article 324(1) places the superintendence, direction and control of elections in the Commission as a whole, not in an individual. They also raise concerns about the integrity of electoral roll data and the large-scale deletions reported during the SIR process across multiple states.
The SIR is a comprehensive verification and cleaning exercise of electoral rolls aimed at ensuring only eligible citizens remain on the voter lists. The Supreme Court had earlier upheld the ECI’s power to conduct SIR in Bihar, holding it consistent with the Representation of the People Act and Article 324. The current petitions focus not on the power to conduct SIR itself, but on the decision-making process within the three-member Commission and specific procedural steps taken during the nationwide exercise.
Whether the CEC can take decisions on behalf of the Election Commission without the concurrence or majority view of the other Commissioners.
The validity of specific directives, software modifications and Form 6 changes linked to SIR.
The need for an independent probe into alleged irregularities.
The outcome could have significant implications for the institutional functioning of the Election Commission and public confidence in the electoral process.
