 (6).png)
1 hour ago
2
ARTICLE AD BOX
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant recused himself from hearing a batch of pleas challenging the law regarding the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other Election Commissioners.
Here's why
"I will be accused of conflict of interest. There is a conflict of interest," the CJI, who was sitting alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, was quoted by new agency PTI as saying.
The law under question — the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 — has been challenged on the grounds that it excludes the CJI from the panel tasked with selecting election commissioners (CEC and the ECs).
According to Bar and Bench, the CJI said it would be appropriate for the case to be heard by a bench where no judge is in line to become the chief justice.
"Should I hear this matter? Somebody may accuse me of conflict of interest," the CJI was quoted as saying.
As per the report, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for a petitioner, suggested that the case may be placed before a Bench that does not have a prospective Chief Justice.
CJI Kant accepted this suggestion to avoid any possible conflicts of interest.
"This is what was in my mind. I should mark the matter to a Bench where the judge is not in line to become CJI. Then nobody can say anything. I have already done my homework," CJI Kant remarked, as per Bar and Bench.
The case is now listed next on April 7. "List this matter on 7 April before a bench to be earmarked separately," the Supreme Court ordered.
What's the law the SC is hearing?
It's the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act of 2023.
The law provided that the election commissioners be appointed by a committee comprising the prime minister, a Union minister nominated by the prime minister and the leader of the Opposition (or the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha).
It excluded the CJI from the selection committee.
Months before the Act was passed in Parliament, a landmark verdict by the Supreme Court in March 2023 directed that the selection committee would consist of the prime minister, the leader of the Opposition, and the chief justice of India. The bench had theb said that the system will remain in force till a law is enacted.
The law was enacted in December 2023.
The PILs said the exclusion of the CJI from the panel undermines the independence of the appointment process.
The law has been challenged by multiple petitioners, including Congress leader Jaya Thakur and the Association for Democratic Reforms.
It has also been challenged on the ground that it runs contrary to a direction issued by the top court in its judgment in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India and ors, which had called for the inclusion of the CJI in the appointment process of ECs.
What has been argued in court before?
Earlier, the Centre defended in the Supreme Court the appointment of two new election commissioners under the 2023 law that excludes the chief justice of India from the selection committee, saying the independence of the Election Commission does not arise from the presence of a judicial member on the committee.
In an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, the Union Law Ministry rejected the petitioner's claim that the two election commissioners were hastily appointed on March 14, 2024, to "pre-empt" the orders of the top court the next day, when the matters challenging the 2023 law were listed for hearing on interim relief.
In 2024, a Bench of former CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta had refused to stay the appointment of new election commissioners under the 2023 law.
It had also declined to interfere with the appointment of two Election Commissioners - Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Gyanesh Kumar - under the said law, Bar and Bench reported.
English (US) ·