Friends, recently the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) issue is in the headlines along with Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. Opposition parties are demanding the CEC’s resignation with the contention that he is biased toward the BJP and helping them to win the election. Then there is one more issue which s that of Form 6, which opposition parties are blaming CEC for changing the format of this form.
There was a petition in the Supreme Court(SC) on these issues. Yesterday, the SC issued notices to the Centre and the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding controversy involving the SIR of electoral rolls. A Bench led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) refused to issue an interim order to suspend CEC Gyanesh Kumar. However, the court demanded accountability regarding how key decisions are being made within the multi-member poll-body.
The primary points of contention in the ‘SC and SIR issue’ include:
1 The Core-Allegation: Unilateral Decision Making
The dispute intensified following media reports and PILL alleging that CEC has been taking major administrative and technological decisions unilaterally. Petitions claim these directives were issued in the name of ECI without consensus or approval of the other two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
- The Objections: The pleas note at least 14 written objections formerly recorded by Sandhu and Joshi between 25th October and August 26 regarding how the voter list revision and guidelines were being handled.
- Legal Question: The SC is reviewing whether a CEC can single-handedly exercise powers that are constitutionally and statutorily designated to be handled collectively (either by unanimity or a majority vote) by the multi-member Commission.
2 Form 6 Flashpoint
A central element under the SC’s scanner is alleged modifications to Form 6-the application form used by citizens to register as new voters.
- The petitions claim changes were introduced during the SIR process that forced first-time voter applicants to provide an extra declaration.
- The issue grew more contentious after the EC! Issued a prèss note claiming top court had already approved these updates. The SC strongly rebuked this claim, clarifying it had never approved modifications to Form 6 and has now explicitly sought all official ECI records concerning these changes.
3 The Supreme Court’s Position
While the bench declined to immediately suspend the CE based solely on initial petition arguments and newspaper reports. It has signalled a strict review:
- One-Week Deadline: The SC gave the Centre, the ECI, CEC Gyanesh Kumar, and the two Election Commissioners one week to submit their formal responses.
- Warning of Annulment: The Bench made it clear that if ECI’s internal statutory procedures and legal framework were bypassed, the court retains the power to set aside any illegal decisions taken during the SIR exercise.
All this started on the basis of an article in the newspaper ‘Indian Express’ which stated that there is a dispute between two ECs and the CEC. The said newspaper has hardly any readership in the country, and in the media reports have already appeared that one political party paid lakhs of Rupees to the said newspaper to publish this article. Why the SC has not commented on this is surprising.
Anil Malik
Mumbai, India
6th October 2026