SC Agrees to Hear Plea Alleging Unilateral Decision-Making by Chief Election Commissioner
The Supreme Court has agreed to take up a significant petition challenging the administrative functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI), specifically examining allegations that Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar bypassed collective decision-making protocols. Represented by senior advocate Vikas Singh, the petitioner urged Chief Justice Surya Kant for an urgent listing, arguing that crucial decisions regarding the ECI were taken without the required consensus or majority vote involving fellow Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
Key Allegations: Centralization of Power and Lack of Consensus
Bringing the matter before a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, the legal counsel emphasized the foundational architecture of India's poll body:
Violation of Multi-Member Norms: The petition argues that under Article 324 of the Constitution and the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Tenure) Act, 2023, the poll panel is designed to function collectively through consensus or majority rule.
Unilateral Actions: Filed by Rakesh Kumar Singh, the plea alleges a continuous centralization of administrative power, noting instances where meeting agendas, minutes, voter list procedural changes, and court appeals reportedly proceeded without the knowledge or approval of the other two Election Commissioners.
Writ of Quo Warranto: The petition seeks a formal writ of quo warranto, requiring the Chief Election Commissioner to legally justify exercising institutional decision-making powers independently.
Legal Scrutiny Ahead
With the Supreme Court setting the hearing for next week, the judiciary will examine whether administrative procedures within the Election Commission adhered to statutory consensus mandates, a verdict that could set crucial institutional precedents for multi-member constitutional bodies in India.

