Former Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna tells Parliamentary Committee that the proposed Bill grants the Election Commission unchecked authority, potentially violating the Constitution’s basic structure. The Bill’s Clause 5 could allow indirect President’s Rule, raising concerns over federal balance.
New Delhi: On August 19, Former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna has raised serious concerns about the proposed legislation for simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, telling a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) that the Bill gives “unfettered discretion” to the Election Commission of India.
The JPC, headed by BJP MP and senior leader P.P. Chaudhary, is reviewing the Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Bill, 2024, widely referred to as the one nation, one election Bill.
Justice (retd.) Khanna became the fifth former Chief Justice to highlight potential legal problems in the proposed legislation.
Earlier, Justices U.U. Lalit, Ranjan Gogoi, Jagdish Singh Kehar, and D.Y. Chandrachud had also pointed out various issues and constitutional concerns with the Bill.
During the three-hour meeting, the committee members extensively questioned Justice Khanna on multiple aspects of the proposed law.
The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024, seeks to introduce Article 82A, along with amendments to Articles 83 and 172 of the Constitution, with the aim of synchronising elections for both the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies.
On the issue of the Bill’s provisions, Justice Khanna said Clause 5 of the proposed Article 82A “confers unfettered discretion” to the Election Commission to decide when elections to a State Legislative Assembly cannot be held together with the Lok Sabha elections.
He added,
“This clause will be open to question as violating and offending the basic structure of the Constitution on the ground of being arbitrary and offending Article 14 of the Constitution.”
Justice Khanna further explained that the clause grants powers to the Election Commission and the Union Government beyond what is envisaged under Article 356 of the Constitution.
He warned,
“Postponement of elections by the ECI may result in indirect President’s Rule – in other words, the Union Government taking over the reins of the State Government. This will be questionable judicially, as violating the federal structure envisaged by the Constitution,”
Addressing the objective behind the legislation, Justice Khanna noted that the Bill does not fulfil its stated aim of reducing policy paralysis caused by differing election cycles in States and the Lok Sabha.
According to sources, he highlighted that the Model Code of Conduct will still apply whenever State Assembly elections are held after premature dissolution, thereby undermining the core purpose for which the legislation has been proposed.
Mr. Chaudhary, the committee chairperson, told The Hindu that the panel will now meet economists to assess the financial implications of the proposed Bill. The government, meanwhile, has maintained that implementing the legislation would lead to significant savings in election-related expenditure.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on One Nation, One Election
