New Delhi: A public interest litigation (PIL) has been moved before the Supreme Court seeking an independent probe into alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI).
The writ petition, filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, has raised issues concerning the functioning of the ECI under Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and sought directions for an investigation into the alleged deletion of around 13 crore names from electoral rolls, restoration of the original Form 6 used for voter registration, and reversal of decisions allegedly taken without the approval of the full Commission.
The plea has relied on documents and media reports published on September 23 concerning written objections raised by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi over decisions taken within the poll panel.
According to the petition, the two Election Commissioners recorded written dissents and objections on at least 14 occasions between November 2025 and August 2026, including objections relating to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, IT systems, and administrative decisions.
The petition claimed that the ECI’s IT division introduced changes to Form 6 by making the “last SIR” linkage mandatory for first-time voters without any amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
It further alleged that statutory powers of Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) were curtailed through centralisation of electoral roll management under the Director General of IT.
Referring to the case of 97 electors in Goa, the plea stated that the EROs were unable to restore their names despite finding them eligible, as the ECINet system did not have a “rollback/reversal” facility.
Another allegation concerns West Bengal, where the petition claimed that 16.10 lakh appeals were filed in the name of the ECI against citizens whose names had been restored by judicial officers during the SIR exercise.
The petitioner has also challenged an administrative order issued on July 28 by Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg, alleging that it altered the IT oversight structure without approval of the full Commission.
The plea said Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi subsequently wrote to Cabinet Secretary T.V. Somanathan, objecting to the order, which they described as a violation of Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023.
The petition has contended that the alleged manipulation of electoral rolls, if established, would fall outside the scope of acts performed in discharge of official duty and therefore could not claim statutory protection.
It has further argued that the protection afforded to the Chief Election Commissioner from civil or criminal proceedings for acts done in the discharge or purported discharge of official duty would not extend to alleged acts having no reasonable nexus with such duties.
The petitioner has sought directions for an investigation into the alleged irregularities and appropriate criminal proceedings against those found responsible.
The PIL comes against the backdrop of an ongoing public debate over differences within the three-member ECI.
Meanwhile, the poll body, in a press note issued on September 23, rejected suggestions that the differences amounted to an institutional “rupture”, saying that internal objections and written notes are established mechanisms in a multi-member constitutional body. The ECI said its decisions are governed by the 2023 law and that differences are resolved through majority decisions.
(IANS)
