The Election Commission of India has responded to reports of differences among its members over the handling of electoral rolls and the Special Intensive Revision, saying that disagreements during internal discussions are part of the normal decision-making process.
The statement came after a report claimed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections on several occasions over decisions concerning voter registration, electoral-roll management and the Commission’s technology systems. According to the report, the two commissioners recorded 14 objections over a period of 10 months.
The Election Commission, however, rejected the suggestion that these internal exchanges reflected a breakdown in its functioning. It said the institution is a multi-member constitutional body operating under Article 324 of the Constitution, relevant laws, rules and established procedures.
EC says differences are part of internal checks
In its clarification, the poll panel said internal notes, observations and differing opinions should not automatically be viewed as evidence of a dispute.
The Commission said such exchanges serve as checks and balances and allow members to examine decisions from different perspectives before a final decision is taken.
According to the ECI, the final decisions on matters including the nationwide SIR exercise were approved unanimously by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
What triggered the controversy?
The controversy followed an investigation by The Indian Express that reported repeated objections by Sandhu and Joshi over decisions linked to electoral-roll management.
The report said the issues included changes to Form 6, which is used for voter registration, access to the electoral-roll database, appeals relating to voter deletions in West Bengal and problems involving the addition of eligible voters in Goa.
One reported objection concerned a change to Form 6. The report said Sandhu described the change as “unauthorised and illegal” and sought its removal. Another concern related to what the commissioners described as the possible “gradual centralisation” of the electoral-roll database.
The report also said the two commissioners had raised questions about certain appeals connected with voter deletions in West Bengal and about software-related difficulties encountered during the electoral-roll revision process in Goa.
Opposition questions Election Commission
The reports have triggered a fresh political confrontation, with opposition parties questioning the functioning of the poll panel and seeking accountability over the reported objections.
Congress and other opposition parties have raised concerns over the reported differences involving two of the three members of the Commission. Several opposition leaders have also demanded scrutiny of the SIR process and questioned the role of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
The Election Commission, however, has maintained that its institutional decisions, including those concerning SIR, were taken collectively and unanimously.
SIR remains at the centre of dispute
The controversy comes as the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls remains a major political issue. The exercise involves reviewing voter records and identifying entries that require verification or correction.
The reported internal objections and the ECI’s subsequent clarification have therefore created two contrasting accounts: one based on reports of repeated concerns raised internally by two commissioners, and the other from the Commission asserting that differing views are a normal part of deliberations and that final decisions received collective approval.
The dispute is likely to keep the spotlight on how electoral rolls are revised, how decisions are taken within the three-member Commission and how disagreements recorded during internal deliberations are resolved.
