- Supreme Court to hear challenges against ECI’s intensive revision process.
- Opposition demands CEC removal; ECI asserts full consensus on orders.
- ECI clarified Form 6 declaration and split online application process.
Congress leader and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday shared a photograph of Lord Mahadev on X with the caption “सत्यम् शिवम् सुन्दरम्” (Satyam Shivam Sundaram), as the confrontation between the Opposition and the Election Commission of India (ECI) over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls entered a crucial legal phase.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear petitions challenging Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and decisions taken by the poll panel during the SIR exercise.
In its counter-affidavit filed before the apex court, the ECI defended the revision process, maintaining that all three orders issued in June 2025, October 2025 and May 2026 were unanimously approved by the Commission’s three members: the CEC and the two Election Commissioners.
ECI Defends SIR Decisions Amid Dispute Over Dissent
The Commission’s response comes after The Indian Express reported on September 25 that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had objected on record at least 14 times over 10 months to SIR-related decisions and orders that they said had been issued without their knowledge or recommendation.
The report triggered protests by Opposition parties, which demanded the removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar. The ECI, however, maintained in its affidavit that the three orders central to the dispute had received unanimous approval.
The affidavit also described the allegations against the Election Commission as “unfortunate”, defending the poll panel’s position amid the continuing political and legal controversy over the electoral roll revision exercise.
सत्यम् शिवम् सुन्दरम् https://t.co/pIfskmfzAt
— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) October 27, 2026
ECI Clarifies Position On Form 6
Rejecting allegations that Form 6, the statutory application form for inclusion in electoral rolls, had been amended, the Commission said the declaration required during the SIR was a separate document introduced under the revision orders. It maintained that the declaration did not form part of Form 6.
However, the ECI acknowledged that the way the declaration appeared on its online platform “could be construed as though an amendment of Form 6 had been made”.
The Commission explained that the declaration had been merged into the online Form 6 page to enable applicants to complete the process using a single OTP and e-signature.
Online Application Process To Be Split Into Two Parts
Following deliberations, the Electoral Rolls Division decided on October 21 to divide online applications into two parts, bringing the digital process in line with the procedure followed for physical forms.
The clarification forms part of the Commission’s response to concerns surrounding the SIR process, including the presentation of documents required from applicants.
The Supreme Court hearing is set to examine the petitions challenging the CEC and the ECI’s decisions during the revision exercise, with the Commission defending the procedure and the Opposition continuing to raise questions over its functioning.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: abplive.com
