SC splits on EC appointment law, sends matter to Constitution Bench

In a dramatic courtroom moment, the bench split as Justice Dipankar Datta rejected a five-judge reference while Justice Satish Chandra Sharma urged a Constitution Bench to settle the issue⁴³. The court then directed that the petitions be placed before the Chief Justice of India to decide on constituting a bench of appropriate strength, citing urgency to resolve long-pending references^23,15.

The 2023 Act replaced the Chief Justice of India with a Union Cabinet Minister in the three-member selection panel for the Election Commission, raising concerns about executive influence and perceived independence^18,42. The judges stressed the need for a truly independent ECI and asked for a prompt administrative decision to avoid further delays, acknowledging the constitutional questions involved^5,7.

The case will now be reviewed by the CJI to decide whether a Constitution Bench should hear the matter, with potential implications for how elections are run and who vets the people who oversee them^41,22. They underscored that resolving the question on composition and procedure could shape the framework for future appointments, affect the balance of power between the executive and judiciary, and determine the degree of insulation of the electoral watchdog from political pressure, while also noting that any ruling could influence the timeline and conduct of elections in the country.

The court signaled a readiness to explore the constitutional avenues and requested that urgent and careful consideration be given to the implications for the integrity and credibility of the Election Commission and the broader electoral ecosystem, stressing that timely judgment is essential to prevent additional stalling in the ongoing, high-stakes debate over oversight and governance of elections.