Lawyer Prashant Bhushan, representing petitioner NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), urged the apex court to list and hear the matter at the earliest, emphasising the urgency of the case.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday scheduled the hearing of pleas challenging the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) under the new 2023 law for February 19—just a day after the current CEC, Rajiv Kumar, retires on February 18.
Lawyer Prashant Bhushan, representing petitioner NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), urged the apex court to list and hear the matter at the earliest, emphasising the urgency of the case. He noted that while the pleas were initially set for a hearing on Wednesday, they had now been deferred to February 19.
“There is serious urgency to hear the matter as the incumbent CEC, Rajiv Kumar, is set to retire on February 18, and the government may appoint a new CEC under the 2023 law, which is under challenge,” Bhushan argued.
A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh, however, fixed February 19 for the hearing. “We are fixing the matter for hearing on February 19,” the bench stated. It also clarified, “If anything happens in the interregnum, then the consequences are bound to follow.”
Bhushan contended that the 2023 law effectively undermines the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling, which had mandated an independent selection panel comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI). The new law, however, replaces the CJI with a Union Minister, raising concerns about potential executive dominance over the Election Commission.
He pointed out that despite the top court’s March 2, 2023, verdict setting up a selection panel including the CJI, the Central government later amended the process.
The new legislation, The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, which was passed in December, now requires appointments to be made based on recommendations from a panel consisting of the Prime Minister, a Cabinet Minister, and the Leader of Opposition.
Bhushan argued that by removing the CJI from the selection panel, “the Executive has acquired control over the appointment of ECs, which is a threat to electoral democracy.”
Several petitioners, including Congress leader Jaya Thakur and NGOs such as ADR, the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), and Lok Prahari, have moved the Supreme Court challenging the validity of Section 7 of the Act, which excludes the CJI from the selection process. They have also sought a stay on its operation.
The petitioners contended that the previous system, which included the CJI, safeguarded the autonomy of the Election Commission.
“The 2023 Act was enacted in response to a Supreme Court ruling that called for insulating the election commissioner appointment process from executive influence, which recommended the inclusion of the CJI in the selection panel,” the petitions stated. “The new legislation, however, diverges from this suggestion, raising concerns about potential political interference in the selection process.”