Supreme Court Issues Notice To ECI On Pleas Against CEC Gyanesh Kumar; Next Hearing Likely On Nov 17

Anti-SIR Pleas Hearing: The Supreme Court on Tuesday, while hearing the petitions seeking suspension of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gaynesh Kumar, has issued a notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI). The top court has also granted ten days' time to the petitioner to file its reply to the poll body's response. The matter is likely to be listed on November 17, or anytime after the Diwali vacations, but after 10 days, reported news agency ANI.

Earlier on Monday, in its affidavit, the poll body informed the top court that it had made no changes to Form 6. It further stated that the decisions were taken jointly by CEC Kumar, Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.

Rahul Gandhi's Post

Ahead of the hearing, Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi shared a post on X, with an image of Lord Shiva. The post also carried message suggesting that truth shall prevail. The Congress-led opposition parties have accused the Election Commission of not following the rules during the revision process. The opposition also cited an Indian Express report that stated that the objections raised by two election commissioners were not addressed by the poll body.

सत्यम् शिवम् सुन्दरम् https://t.co/pIfskmfzAt

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) October 27, 2026

What ECI Said In Its Counter-Affidavit

- The counter-affidavit was approved unanimously by the CEC and both Election Commissioners.

- All three SIR orders issued in June 2025, October 2025, and May 2026 were unanimous decisions of the Commission.

- Internal notes, queries, or suggestions made while a file moves through the office do not constitute final decisions. Files are reviewed by one EC, then the second EC, before reaching the CEC. In urgent cases, electronic approval is taken and recorded on file later.

ALSO READ: MLC Polls Counting Live: Vote Counting For 28 Seats Across UP, Bihar, Maharashtra, Karnataka Underway

- Any officer issuing orders beyond their delegated powers will face action. A July 28 work allocation order issued by an Additional Secretary on deputation was never implemented following the EC's joint direction on July 30.

- The Commission stated it never released or authorised the release of any internal notes or files to the media.
Form 6 has not been amended, as only the Central Government can amend it; the SIR declaration remains a separate document.

- Acknowledging that the online display could be interpreted as an amendment, the ECI stated that from October 21, the online application will split Form 6 and the declaration to match the physical form.

- Unmapped voters do not need to attend hearings in person. Booth Level Officers (BLOs) will collect documents from their homes, with hearings only for exceptional cases, preferably online.

- No voter name can be added or deleted on ECINet without an order from the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO). A committee with experts from IITs and IISc has been formed to check compliance.

- Out of 97 "left out" voters in Goa, 88 were already enrolled, six were abroad, and three held Portuguese passports.

- Appeals regarding voter inclusions in West Bengal were filed by officers of the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), West Bengal, under Supreme Court orders, and were not brought directly to the Commission.

ALSO READ: SIR Row: ECI Calls All Orders Unanimous In 15-Point Affidavit, Says Internal Notes By Two ECs Not Final Decisions

- Plea to restrain the CEC was not maintainable; a CEC can only be removed through the same procedure as a Supreme Court judge.

- Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected past challenges to Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).

- A short reply has been filed due to the Dussehra vacation, and the ECI sought the court's permission to submit a detailed, paragraph-wise response later.