The Supreme Court bench was hearing today a challenge to the recently-enacted law to govern the appointment and service conditions of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other Election Commissioners.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India Today (March 15th) made a decision not to halt the appointments of new Election Commissioners (ECs), which were made under a new law enacted in 2023. This particular legislation is noteworthy for its exclusion of the Chief Justice of India from the selection committee.
The bench, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Dipankar Datta, and Augustine George Masih, addressed the concerns raised by petitioners regarding the expedited meeting for the selection of ECs, advising them to submit a separate application highlighting this specific issue.
The court’s stance on not suspending the appointments made according to the 2023 law was clearly stated:
“Normally and generally, we do not stay a law by way of an interim order.”
This reflects the judiciary’s cautious approach towards intervening in laws passed by the legislature, especially in a preliminary manner. The bench also decided to postpone the hearing concerning several petitions that contest the legitimacy of the appointment of two ECs under the controversial 2023 legislation.
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, representing petitioner Jaya Thakur, argued against any deviation from established legal judgments, asserting,
“when a judgment is passed, there cannot be any transgression.”
He articulated that the new law governing the appointment, conditions of service, and tenure of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners embodied a
“clear-cut transgression.”
The context of this legal scrutiny stems from the recent appointments of former Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Sandhu as election commissioners. Their selection was overseen by a panel led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. These appointments filled the vacancies left by Anup Chandra Pandey, who retired on February 14, and Arun Goel, who unexpectedly resigned, thereby sparking a legal and political debate over the new selection process.
CASE TITLE:
Dr Jaya Thakur and Ors vs Union of India and Anr
BACKGROUND
The Supreme Court earlier announced on March 13th, its decision to consider a petition filed by a non-governmental organization (NGO), Association for Democratic Reforms, challenging the exclusion of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) from the committee responsible for selecting the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other election commissioners. The plea, represented by lawyer Prashant Bhushan, was acknowledged by a bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who confirmed the urgent hearing set for March 15, stating,
“I just got the message from the CJI that it will be listed on Friday (March 15th).”
The NGO’s legal challenge targets the provisions of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023. According to the contested law, the selection committee is composed of the Prime Minister, who serves as the chairperson, the Leader of the Opposition, and a Union Minister appointed by the Prime Minister. This new legislation has sparked controversy due to its exclusion of the Chief Justice of India from the selection process.
The petition comes in the wake of Election Commissioner Arun Goel’s sudden resignation, leaving two positions within the Election Commission vacant. This development is particularly significant as India prepares for its upcoming elections, with the Narendra Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party aiming for a third consecutive term in office.
The NGO’s petition references a prior judgment by the Supreme Court’s Constitution bench in the case of Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India, which emphasized the importance of removing the appointment of Election Commission members from the exclusive purview of the executive branch to safeguard the integrity of India’s democratic processes and ensure the conduct of free and fair elections. The petitioners are urging the Supreme Court to mandate that the vacant positions be filled in accordance with the selection committee framework established in the Anoop Baranwal case.
In a landmark decision in March 2023, the Supreme Court had specified that the selection of the CEC and other election commissioners should be conducted by a committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and the Chief Justice of India.
The challenge to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, is not isolated. Jaya Thakur, a leader from the opposition Congress party, has also filed a petition against the act, requesting the court to prevent the Centre from proceeding with appointments under the new law. The contentious provision under scrutiny states,
“Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners shall be appointed by the President on the recommendation of a Selection Committee consisting of — (a) the Prime Minister — Chairperson; (b) the Leader of Opposition in the House of the People — Member; (c) a Union Cabinet Minister to be nominated by the Prime Minister — Member.”
This legal battle underscores the ongoing debate over the independence and impartiality of India’s electoral appointment process.
READ/DOWNLOAD PIL–
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Elections in India
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
