New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday fixed February 19 to hear pleas against the appointment of the chief election commissioner and election commissioners under the 2023 law saying if anything happens in the interregnum, the consequences are bound to follow.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh was told by advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for an NGO, that earlier the pleas were scheduled to be heard Wednesday but now they have been listed for hearing February 19.
Bhushan said the urgency in the matter is that Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar is scheduled to superannuate February 18 and the government may appoint the new CEC under the 2023 law, which is under challenge.
The bench said, “We are fixing the matter for hearing February 19. If anything happens in the interregnum, then the consequences are bound to follow.”
Bhushan, appearing for NGO ‘Association for Democratic Reforms’, said the apex court registry has informed them that as Justice Kant was unwell, the matters were posted for hearing February 19.
Justice Kant said now all the matters will be taken up for hearing February 19.
February 3, the top court while fixing the matter for Wednesday, said it will decide the issue on merit and finally.
Bhushan had earlier submitted that the 2023 verdict held that the election commissioners have to be selected for appointment by an independent panel comprising the prime minister, Leader of the Opposition and Chief Justice of India.
“They have brought an Act by which they have removed the chief justice and brought in another minister, effectively making the commissioners appointment only at the pleasure of the government. You need to have an independent committee to appoint the election commissioners,” Bhushan had said.
Advocate Varun Thakur, appearing for petitioner Congress’ Jaya Thakur, had earlier submitted that they had moved the application seeking a direction to the Centre that the appointment of the CEC should be made as per the March 2, 2023 verdict of the Constitution bench.
March 15, 2024, the top court refused to stay the appointments of new ECs under a 2023 law which excluded the CJI from the selection panel and deferred the hearing on a batch of pleas challenging the appointments.
The apex court told the petitioners the March 2, 2023 verdict directed for the three-member panel comprising the prime minister, Leader of the Opposition and the CJI to operate till Parliament enacted a law.
The NGO challenged the CJI’s exclusion and contended the election commission should be insulated from “political” and “executive interference” to maintain a healthy democracy.
ADR’s plea alleged the verdict was overruled by the Centre without removing its basis and the composition of the selection committee under the new law which amounted to excessive interference of the executive in the appointments and was detrimental to the independence of the poll panel.
Former IAS officers Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Sandhu were recommended to be appointed as ECs in 2024 by a selection panel chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi under the new law.
The NGO challenged the validity and sought a stay on the operation of Section 7 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, which excluded the CJI.
The apex court’s March 2, 2023 verdict held that leaving the appointment of the ECs and CEC in the hands of the executive would be detrimental to the health of the country’s democracy and the holding of free and fair elections.
Thakur has sought to restrain the Centre from appointing new ECs under the 2023 law while challenging its provisions.
PTI
