Goalpokhar

Supreme Court will hear on Monday a batch of petitions seeking suspension of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. These petitions also challenge decisions taken by the Election Commission without approval from the two other election commissioners.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana will hear the petitions. They were filed by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh and advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi. The pleas also challenge guidelines and software changes made by Kumar without the approval of his colleagues.

Singh's petition

Singh's PIL asks the court to decide if Kumar used powers on his own that legally belong to the Election Commission as a whole. The plea demands his suspension until the final hearing. This would preserve the multi-member nature of the poll panel.

The petition follows a report claiming that election commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi objected on record at least 14 times over the past 10 months. They said decisions concerning the electoral rolls were made without their knowledge or recommendation.

Tripathi's plea

Tripathi's plea says the CEC's actions break the legal rule of collective decision-making. It also seeks criminal proceedings against the CEC and other officials for alleged breaches of official duty.

One key issue concerns changes to Form 6, used by people to register as voters. The plea says a new requirement about ancestral details and a link with the previous SIR was added through the software. This happened without the statutory amendment needed under electoral rules.

Concerns about electoral roll revisions in Goa and West Bengal have also been raised.

• Goa: The software lacked a feature to restore 97 eligible voters despite directions for their verification.
• West Bengal: More than 16.10 lakh appeals were allegedly filed in the EC's name against voters whose names had been restored by judicial officers.

With inputs from PTI

Election Commission of India has announced decisions on issues that commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised over the past 10 months. Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and both commissioners discussed these points at a meeting on Saturday.

At least 14 times over 10 months, Sandhu and Joshi had logged objections. Some said decisions were issued without their knowledge.

Key Issues Raised

Changes to Form 6: Joshi objected to modifications in Form 6, used for enrolling new voters. He said it cannot be changed without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Sandhu agreed. The EC said an added SIR-related declaration had been upheld by the Supreme Court and would apply only during SIR exercises. Outside SIR, regular forms will be used.

Electoral roll database access: Both commissioners raised concerns over centralising the electoral roll database. A committee headed by a senior deputy election commissioner, including an independent IIT or IIIT expert, will review the ECINET system for compliance with election laws.

Goa's 97 voters: After a Supreme Court order, EROs in Goa found 97 eligible voters. The software had no option to restore their names. The Goa CEO's office wrote eight times asking for a rollback. BLOs have now been asked to visit these voters. Of the 97, 81 have already filled Form 6 for inclusion.

IT division oversight: Sandhu and Joshi had written to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan about changes in work distribution in the EC's IT setup. The EC said the disputed work-redistribution orders were never implemented and oversight was never removed.

Voter appeals in West Bengal: Sandhu questioned appeals filed to delete voters whom judicial officers had included in West Bengal electoral rolls. He noted that he, Joshi, and the West Bengal CEO had not been informed. The EC said anyone left out during or after SIR may apply to the ERO. It also directed CEOs, DEOs, and EROs to start a special enrolment drive.

All decisions and responses were detailed in an EC press note dated September 26.

Congress leader Jairam Ramesh raised questions about the Special Intensive Revision process in Goa. He says the election process is not working well after reports showed the Goa CEO wrote to the Election Commission of India eight times in one week. These letters asked to add back 97 voters who the ECINet software removed even though they were eligible.

The opposition is now asking to cancel the exercise. Vijai Sardesai from Goa Forward Party said many local elections are decided by a few votes. He warned that these deletions could change the 2027 assembly results. BJP rejected these claims, saying the opposition is just trying to make election officials look bad.

National voter roll updates

Across the country, the revision exercise removed over 13 crore names from draft rolls in 30 states and Union Territories. Internal reports show two Election Commissioners objected 14 times over the last 10 months about these rules. For details on constituencies like Goalpokhar, Jangoan, or Goalpara West, voters can check current electoral roll information.

Serious questions have surfaced about how India handles voter registration. Two of the three Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, have officially raised concerns 14 times over the last ten months. They state that key decisions about the national voter database and registration forms were made without them knowing or giving approval.

The issue relates to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. Objections point to changes to Form 6, which now asks for family history from older voter lists. This could create problems for new voters trying to sign up. Also, there are worries about the centralization of the ERONet database. The commissioners argue that IT departments in New Delhi are limiting the power of local Electoral Registration Officers, who are legally in charge of keeping accurate lists.

Election oversight issues

Specific cases in Goa and West Bengal show these problems. In Goa, 97 eligible voters were left off the list because software did not record their status. In West Bengal, many appeals remain unexplained. The commissioners cannot find out who filed them on behalf of the Commission. The Election Commission says all decisions were unanimous and internal talks are normal. Still, the recorded disagreements point to a breakdown in how the Indian voting process is managed.

For a list of these internal objections, see the official chronology report.

Questions have been raised about how Election Commission of India works. Reports say that two out of three election commissioners objected at least 14 times during a 10-month period. It seems these decisions were made without their full involvement.

Former Chief Election Commissioner O.P. Rawat called this situation unfortunate. He specifically criticized changes to voter registration Form 6, calling them illegal. Former CEC S.Y. Quraishi pointed out that the commission is a three-member body by law. He noted it cannot work properly if decisions skip the required majority vote.

Concerns about voting lists

Former commissioner Ashoka Lavasa asked for more clarity. He wants documents showing how these disputed decisions were actually made. A main concern is whether software systems are now overriding the legal power of electoral registration officers. This has reportedly led to eligible voters being left off rolls in areas like New Delhi, Goalpokhar, or Jangoan. Election Commission of India states that all its work follows the law.

Questions about the independence of Election Commission of India have surfaced after a split verdict in Supreme Court. The court is reviewing the 2023 law on how election commissioners are appointed. Critics say the current panel structure, which includes a Cabinet minister, may affect the neutrality of the selection process.

Internal disagreements

Internal friction has also come to light. Reports show that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi raised objections several times about managing voter databases and updating electoral rolls. These concerns focus on the software used and the process for adding or removing voter names.

The Commission says its decisions are unanimous. Still, experts suggest that recording these disagreements through formal votes could provide better clarity for people. This is important as citizens check their status in the Delhi electoral rolls or look for updates in constituencies like Goalpokhar.