Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar is facing renewed demands for removal amid a dispute over the Election Commission’s handling of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and reported objections raised by two Election Commissioners. Opposition parties are preparing another removal motion in Parliament, while the Election Commission has maintained that internal objections are part of its deliberative process and that its final decisions, including those on SIR, were unanimous.
The legal question is how far the government, Parliament and courts can go in seeking a CEC’s removal. Under Article 324(5) of the Constitution, a CEC can be removed only through the same process and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge, making removal possible only for proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has referred challenges to the 2023 law governing the appointment of election commissioners to a Constitution Bench, adding another layer to the debate over the independence and accountability of the Election Commission.
Why Is Gyanesh Kumar Facing Removal Demands?
The latest controversy follows an investigation by The Indian Express, which reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections at least 14 times over 10 months regarding decisions and orders concerning electoral-roll management and SIR. The reported objections included issues relating to voter registration, deletion and restoration of names, changes to Form 6 and the management of electoral-roll databases.
The ECI has said such written observations and differences are part of normal internal checks and that its decisions were ultimately unanimous. Opposition leaders have nevertheless called for Kumar’s removal, with Congress sources telling The Indian Express that a fresh motion is being drafted with legal experts and could be submitted in both Houses of Parliament.
What Does The Law Actually Allow?
Removing a CEC is deliberately subject to a high constitutional threshold. Article 324(5) states that the CEC cannot be removed except in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge. Under the procedure governing judicial removal, a notice requires the support of at least 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs.
If admitted, a three-member committee examines the allegations. It includes a Supreme Court judge, a Chief Justice of a High Court and a distinguished jurist. If the committee finds misbehaviour or incapacity proved, both Houses must pass an address supporting removal by a special majority: a majority of the total membership and at least two-thirds of members present and voting. Only then can the President issue the removal order. An earlier motion against Kumar, submitted in March with 130 Lok Sabha and 63 Rajya Sabha signatures, was rejected by the presiding officers in April.
The issue is also unfolding alongside a major constitutional challenge. On September 23, the Supreme Court referred challenges to the 2023 Election Commissioners appointment law to a Constitution Bench after a two-judge bench delivered split opinions on whether the matter required a larger bench. The 2023 law replaced the Chief Justice of India on the selection panel with a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister, leaving the Prime Minister, the nominated minister and the Leader of Opposition on the three-member committee. The petitions challenge this framework and raise questions about the independence of the Election Commission.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The Election Commission occupies a crucial place in India’s democratic system, and debates over its powers, independence and accountability deserve careful public scrutiny. At the same time, allegations against constitutional authorities should be tested through established legal and parliamentary procedures rather than political rhetoric alone.
A transparent process that allows competing claims to be examined, evidence to be assessed and constitutional safeguards to operate can help protect both institutional accountability and public trust. As this debate moves to Parliament and the Supreme Court, how can India ensure that its election institutions remain both independent and answerable to the people?
Also Read: AISA President Neha Bora, Gaurav Gogoi Detained During Nationwide Protests Against CEC Gyanesh Kumar
