.png)
Turmoil inside the ECI? Two Election Commissioners flagged 14 'illegal' moves in 10 months amid SIR
The Election Commission of India's (ECI) handling of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) has come under renewed scrutiny after two of its three Election Commissioners formally objected to several decisions over the past 10 months, according to an investigation by The Indian Express.
Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi reportedly recorded at least 14 objections—including four on a single day—over decisions and communications they said were taken without their knowledge. The objections covered voter registration, deletion and restoration of names, electoral-roll software and appeals linked to the SIR.
The ECI, however, has maintained that decisions including the SIR were taken unanimously. "All decisions of the Election Commission of India, including SIR, have been unanimous and with the approval of both the Election Commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner," ECI sources clarified.
Dispute over Form 6 for new voters
One issue concerns Form 6, which is used by citizens to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll.
According to The Indian Express, the form was changed to ask new applicants whether they or their parents or grandparents “exist” in the “electoral roll of last SIR”. Joshi had reportedly objected to the change in May, with Sandhu agreeing that it could not be made without an amendment to the relevant rules.
Sandhu later described the change as “unauthorised and illegal” and called for its removal.
Concerns over centralised voter database
The two Commissioners also raised concerns about access to electoral-roll databases. Joshi reportedly flagged what he described as “gradual centralisation of the electoral roll database” and sought an audit to establish that only authorised statutory officials could make changes.
Sandhu subsequently said some state election officials did not have “proper and complete access” to the ERONet portal, according to the report.
ECI INTERNAL RIFT: 8 Key Points on the 14 Objections by Two Election Commissioners
Two Election Commissioners objected 14 times: Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi reportedly recorded at least 14 formal objections over decisions taken by the Election Commission in the past 10 months.
Disagreements centred on the SIR: The objections came amid the nationwide Special Intensive Revision (SIR), which has affected voter rolls across 30 States and Union Territories.
Form 6 change questioned: The Commissioners objected to changes in the voter registration Form 6, with Sandhu later calling the change “unauthorised and illegal”.
Concerns over voter database access: Joshi and Sandhu raised concerns about what they described as the “gradual centralisation of the electoral roll database” and questioned restrictions on access for statutory election officials.
Questions over West Bengal appeals: Sandhu sought clarity on who authorised and filed appeals against voters included in the electoral rolls by judicial officers during the West Bengal SIR process.
Goa software issue: A software problem meant 97 voters found eligible by Electoral Registration Officers could not be restored to the final roll despite directions to hear such cases.
Concerns over Commission approval: Both Commissioners reportedly objected to communications being issued in the name of the ECI without approval from the full Commission.
EC says decisions were unanimous: The Election Commission has rejected reports of internal disagreement, saying that all decisions, including the SIR, were taken unanimously with the approval of the CEC and both Election Commissioners.
Questions over West Bengal appeals
Another objection concerned appeals filed in West Bengal against voters whom judicial officers had included in the rolls.
Sandhu asked Commission officials, “Who was authorised to file these appeals on behalf of ECI, and by whom?” and “Who actually filed these appeals on behalf of ECI?”
He reportedly said neither he nor Joshi nor West Bengal’s Chief Electoral Officer had been informed about the basis or process for filing those appeals.
Goa software issue raises another concern
The dispute also extended to Goa, where 97 voters were found eligible by Electoral Registration Officers after being flagged for “logical discrepancies”. However, the software lacked a mechanism to record the decisions before the final roll was published.
The Goa CEO’s office reportedly wrote eight times seeking a rollback facility, but it was not enabled before the deadline, leaving the 97 names off the final roll.
What the law says about EC decisions
The Election Commission is a constitutional body under Article 324, with the CEC and two Election Commissioners equal in rank. Section 18 of the 2023 law says the Commission’s business “shall, as far as possible, be transacted unanimously”. If there is a difference of opinion, the matter is decided by majority.
Sandhu and Joshi also raised concerns about communications being issued without approval of the full Commission. Sandhu wrote that “many communications go out in the name of the ECI but they do not have the approval of the Commission”, while Joshi said “several communications are disseminated in the name of the ECI without the requisite approval of ‘the Commission’,” according to The Indian Express.
