Election Commission tells SC SIR decisions unanimous

Election Commission's Unanimous Decisions

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has submitted a counter-affidavit to the Supreme Court, stating that all decisions concerning the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls were taken unanimously by its three members, as reported by moneycontrol.com and news.abplive.com. This clarification comes in response to allegations that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar had taken unilateral decisions regarding the SIR exercise.

Decision-Making Process

The ECI has explained its decision-making process, stating that files are ordinarily sent first to one Election Commissioner, then to the other, and finally to the CEC, as reported by moneycontrol.com. In urgent cases, approvals are obtained electronically and subsequently recorded on the file. The Commission has emphasized that suggestions, observations, or queries made by individual commissioners or officers while a file is being processed do not constitute decisions of the Election Commission, as stated in the affidavit.

Form 6 and SIR Declaration

The ECI has clarified that Form 6, used for voter registration, was not amended, as stated in the affidavit, and that only the Central Government has the authority to change it, as reported by indiatoday.in. The declaration required during the SIR exercise is a separate document, introduced to allow applicants to establish links with their own or their parents' or grandparents' names in previous electoral rolls, as reported by siasat.com. The Commission has acknowledged that the online presentation of the declaration could have created confusion regarding changes to Form 6 and has decided to separate the two in the online application process from October 21, as reported by indiatoday.in.

Detail	Information
SIR Orders	June 24, 2025; October 27, 2025; and May 14, 2026, as reported by republicworld.com
Decision-Making Process	Files sent to one Election Commissioner, then to the other, and finally to the CEC, as reported by moneycontrol.com
Form 6	Not amended; only the Central Government has the authority to change it, as reported by indiatoday.in
SIR Declaration	Separate document; introduced to allow applicants to establish links with their own or their parents' or grandparents' names in previous electoral rolls, as reported by siasat.com

Opposition to Petition

The ECI has opposed a petition seeking to restrain the CEC from functioning, arguing that the allegations are misconceived and the reliefs sought are legally unsustainable, as stated in the counter-affidavit. The Commission has maintained that the CEC can be removed only through a process similar to that applicable to a Supreme Court judge and that restraining the CEC from performing his duties would interfere with the statutory functioning and decision-making process of the Commission, as reported by kalingatv.com.

Frequently Asked Questions

Were the SIR decisions taken unanimously by the Election Commission?

Yes, according to the ECI, all decisions concerning the SIR of electoral rolls were taken unanimously by its three members, as reported by moneycontrol.com and news.abplive.com.

Was Form 6 amended during the SIR exercise?

No, the ECI has clarified that Form 6 was not amended and that only the Central Government has the authority to change it, as reported by indiatoday.in.

What is the next step in the Supreme Court case?

The matter is scheduled to be heard by a Supreme Court bench, and the ECI has sought permission to submit a detailed, point-by-point reply to the petitions in due course, as reported by republicworld.com.

The ECI's submission to the Supreme Court has clarified the decision-making process and the status of Form 6, but the controversy surrounding the SIR exercise is likely to continue. The Commission's opposition to the petition seeking to restrain the CEC from functioning has set the stage for a potentially contentious hearing. As the case progresses, the Supreme Court will examine the ECI's records to ascertain the facts and determine the next course of action. The outcome of this case will have significant implications for the functioning of the Election Commission and the integrity of the electoral process in India.