"Election Commission Faces Scrutiny Over Internal Dissent, Roll Disputes"
Article 324
Constitutional provision vesting election superintendence, direction, and control in the ECI.
Special Intensive Revision (SIR)
A targeted electoral roll update under Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
Article 324 of the Constitution gives the Election Commission of India (ECI) superintendence, direction, and control over all elections to Parliament and state legislatures. The ECI has functioned as a three-member body since 1989, comprising the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two Election Commissioners (ECs). All three members hold equal authority, and decisions are taken by majority vote. This collegial design was confirmed by the Supreme Court in the mid-1990s, when a dispute arose over whether the CEC held more power than the other two members. The Court ruled clearly that the CEC has no superior vote.
The Representation of the People Act, 1950 governs voter rolls. Its Section 21 allows a Special Revision of rolls when existing rolls are considered deficient. This is the legal basis for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls that has recently drawn internal criticism within the ECI.
The Constitution creates a sharp asymmetry in how the three members are protected from removal. Under Article 324(5) read with Article 124(4), the CEC can be removed only through a process similar to impeaching a Supreme Court judge. This requires a majority of the total membership of each House of Parliament and not less than two-thirds of members present and voting, after a formal inquiry. The other two ECs enjoy no such protection. They can be removed by the President, but only on the CEC's own recommendation. This gives the CEC informal leverage over colleagues even though all three votes count equally.
The Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023) tried to reduce executive dominance over ECI appointments. The Court directed that a selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India would choose the CEC and ECs until Parliament passed a law. Parliament responded with the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners Act, 2023. This Act replaced the Chief Justice with a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister. The result is that the government holds an effective two-to-one majority on the selection panel, which critics argue undermines the independence the Court sought to protect.
Electoral roll management is central to the ECI's function. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) under Section 21 of the 1950 Act is a mechanism to update rolls when they are found to be deficient. …
Consider the following statements:
1.Union Territories are not represented in the Rajya Sabha.
2.It is within the purview of the Chief Election Commissioner to adjudicate the election disputes.
3.According to the Constitution of India, the Parliament consists of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha only.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Consider the following statements:
1.The Election Commission of India is a five-member body.
2.Union Ministry of Home Affairs decides the election schedule for the conduct of both general elections and bye-elections.
3.Election Commission resolves the disputes relating to splits/mergers of recognised political parties.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
With reference to the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), consider the following statements: 1. The Supreme Court in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023) directed that a committee of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India select the CEC until Parliament enacted a law. 2. The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners Act, 2023 retains the Chief Justice of India as a member of the selection committee. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Consider the following statements regarding the removal of members of the Election Commission of India: 1. The Chief Election Commissioner can be removed from office only through a process similar to that for removing a Supreme Court judge. 2. The other Election Commissioners can be removed by the President only on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Match List-I (Function/Provision) with List-II (Legal basis) and select the correct answer using the codes given below:
List-I:
A.Superintendence and control of elections
B.Special revision of electoral rolls
C.Adjudication of election disputes
D.Removal of the Chief Election Commissioner
List-II:
1.Article 324
2.Section 21, Representation of the People Act, 1950
3.Election Petitions under the Representation of the People Act, 1951
4.Process similar to removing a Supreme Court judge
Consider the following statements: 1. The Constitution of India fixes the strength of the Election Commission of India at three members. 2. The Supreme Court has held that the Chief Election Commissioner and the other Election Commissioners have equal powers in decision-making, with disagreements settled by majority. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Consider the following statements: 1. Disputes regarding the validity of a declared election result are adjudicated by the Election Commission of India. 2. Election petitions challenging an election's result are heard by High Courts under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account