Every election needs an umpire. In India, that umpire is the Election Commission of India (ECI).
This week we learned the umpire has been arguing with itself.
An Indian Express investigation (Sep 23) found that two of the three Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, objected on record at least 14 times in 10 months to decisions they say were taken without their knowledge. Four of those objections came on a single day.
For UPSC, this is not gossip. It touches Article 324, a 2023 law, a Supreme Court judgment and the biggest voter-roll exercise in years. Let’s break it down.
First: what is the ECI?
A constitutional body under Article 324. It has superintendence, direction and control of elections to Parliament, State legislatures, and the offices of President and Vice-President.
It has one Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two Election Commissioners (ECs).
The CEC and ECs are equal in rank. The CEC is first among equals. He cannot decide alone.
Removal: the CEC can be removed only like a Supreme Court judge. An EC can be removed only on the CEC’s recommendation (Article 324(5)).
What does the law say when they disagree?
Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 says:
All business of the Commission shall, as far as possible, be transacted unanimously.
If the CEC and ECs differ, the matter is decided by majority.
The Commission can settle its own procedure and division of work, but only by unanimous decision.
So on paper, two ECs can outvote the CEC. That is exactly why “decisions taken without our knowledge” is serious. Majority rule only works if all three are in the room.
What did the two ECs object to?
1. Form 6 and “new voters”
Form 6 is the form every adult fills to become a voter. From July, it started asking whether the applicant or their parents/grandparents existed in the “electoral roll of last SIR”. Joshi had warned on file in May that Form 6 could not be changed this way without the government amending the rules. On August 13, Sandhu recorded that the change was “unauthorised and illegal”.
2. Who controls the voter database
Each constituency’s roll is prepared by the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO), a statutory authority, usually the SDM. The roll sits on ERONet and its successor ECINet. Joshi flagged the “gradual centralisation of the electoral roll database”. Sandhu recorded that state officials said they did not have proper and complete access. Decentralised roll preparation has been the ECI’s main defence against rigging allegations for decades.
3. West Bengal appeals
Sandhu asked who authorised appeals filed on behalf of the ECI against voters whom judicial officers had included in the rolls.
4. Goa
EROs found 97 voters eligible after hearing them, as the Supreme Court had directed. The software had no way to record that decision in time, and the 97 were left off the final roll.
The two ECs also wrote separately to the Cabinet Secretary about changes in work allocation made without their knowledge. The CEC and the two ECs met on September 9, their first full meeting in four months.
The backdrop: SIR
The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls began in Bihar in June 2025. It has struck more than 13 crore names off draft rolls across 30 States and UTs.
On September 22, a Supreme Court bench led by CJI Surya Kant said the Delhi SIR notices sent to over 33 lakh voters for “logical discrepancies” looked “mechanically issued” and “machine-generated”, and asked the ECI to consider more filters.
The appointment question
Anoop Baranwal v Union of India (March 2023): a Constitution Bench said that until Parliament makes a law, the CEC and ECs will be picked by a panel of the PM, the Leader of Opposition and the CJI.
2023 Act: replaced the CJI with a Union Cabinet minister nominated by the PM. The government now has two of three votes on the panel. All three current members were appointed under this Act.
September 23, 2026: a two-judge bench (Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma) split on whether the challenge needs a Constitution Bench and placed it before the CJI.
Justice Datta’s line is worth quoting in Mains: “it is not enough for the ECI to be independent, it must also appear to be independent.”
Why this matters for GS2
Collegial functioning: a multi-member body is meant to check any one member. Section 18 only works if decisions actually go to all three.
Independence: appointment (2023 Act) and removal (ECs removable on CEC’s recommendation) both lean towards concentration of power.
Decentralisation as a safeguard: the ERO’s statutory control over the roll is what makes rigging hard. Centralised IT control weakens that.
Right to vote vs clean rolls: roll purity matters, but not at the cost of eligible voters being struck off by software.
Prelims pointers
Article 324: Election Commission
Article 326: elections on the basis of adult suffrage
Section 18, 2023 Act: unanimity as far as possible, otherwise majority
Anoop Baranwal (2023): PM + LoP + CJI panel, till Parliament made a law
Form 6: application for inclusion as a new voter
ERO: statutory officer who prepares each constituency’s roll
Mains practice question
“The independence of the Election Commission depends as much on how it functions internally as on how its members are appointed.” Discuss in the light of recent developments. (15 marks, 250 words)
Write it. Share your answer on Twitter tagging me here
Sources: The Indian Express (Sep 23-24, 2026), The Hindu (Sep 22, 2026)