CEC Gyanesh Kumar, 2 ECs hold meeting amid SIR row; issue clarification on key matters

The Election Commission on Saturday said its key decisions on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls had been taken with the “unanimous approval” of all three commissioners, rejecting suggestions of differences within the poll panel over the exercise.

Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi attended the Commission’s meeting at Nirvachan Sadan on Saturday.

The EC in a statement announced some decisions on the SIR and the commission’s internal functioning, and laid out its position on a letter written to the Cabinet Secretary, reportedly by Sandhu and Joshi as media reports asserted.

The controversy spans objections raised by Joshi and Sandhu on issues such as changes to Form 6 used for new voter enrolment, the functioning of the online system ECINET, the redistribution of work in the IT division, appeals in the West Bengal SIR, and the handling of cases involving voters in Goa, for instance. In an immediate response earlier, the EC had argued that internal disagreements were part of its democratic functioning.

Point-By-Point Clarification
On the Form 6 issue, questions were raised over a declaration attached to the form during the SIR process, asking prospective voters to map to the previous SIR via their parents’ names. The commission’s note said the declaration was upheld by the Supreme Court. It added that outside the SIR period, forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, would be used.

On ECINET, concerns were raised over access to the electoral-roll database and the functioning of the portal. The commission said field officers have role-based access according to their statutory powers. It also announced a review of the ECINET by a committee headed by a Senior Deputy Election Commissioner and including an independent expert from an IIT or IIIT. The commission said any further flexibility required by field officers would be made operational too. It also decided that all new initiatives involving IT modules and portals would be discussed by the committee of officers before being placed before the commission for approval.

Another issue concerned a letter sent to the Cabinet Secretary over the redistribution of work “involving an officer on deputation to the EC”. The commission said the letter was not related to any policy matter of the EC or its IT division, but to the functioning of the officer. It said the work redistribution orders objected to were not implemented after directions from the two commissioners, and that oversight of the IT division by a Deputy Election Commissioner was never withdrawn.

On the SIR, it said the June 24, 2025, order launching the exercise across states and Union Territories was issued with the unanimous approval of the commission — an assertion made by EC sources on Friday too. The press note said subsequent schedules were also issued with unanimous approval. It noted that the Supreme Court had upheld the original SIR order.

The commission pointedly addressed the case of 97 voters in Goa who had been left out of the electoral rolls. It said the Goa Chief Electoral Officer had directed Booth Level Officers to conduct house-to-house visits and collect their forms. Of the 97 voters, 81 had already filled Form 6 for inclusion.

The commission also announced measures aimed at strengthening its internal functioning. Agendas for all commission meetings will now be circulated in advance and minutes will be issued. It said directions issued by commissioners to officials would be meticulously complied with.

Deadline Extended
The deadline for filing claims and objections in Delhi under the SIR process was also extended to October 30, with the disposal target extended to November 30. In Maharashtra, the corresponding deadlines were extended to October 12 and November 10.

The controversy, however, has moved beyond questions of internal procedure. Opposition parties have cited the reported objections by Joshi and Sandhu to question the functioning of the Commission and have demanded Gyanesh Kumar’s ouster. The dispute has also become closely linked to the wider political battle over SIR, with Opposition parties demanding greater transparency from the poll panel.

The commission’s latest statement seeks to draw a distinction between internal deliberations and formal decisions, maintaining that its major decisions, including SIR, were taken collectively and unanimously.