img

Amidst the corridors of legal deliberation in New Delhi, the Supreme Court, on Thursday, abstained from intervening in the induction of two novel election commissioners, citing the imminent elections and the potential havoc that a halt to their appointment could wreak.

A panel comprising justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta directed advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the Association for Democratic Reforms, to peruse Clause 2 of Article 324. Justice Khanna elucidated that from the outset until the court’s verdict in 2023, presidential appointments were a customary practice, and the mechanism for appointing election commissioners had been efficacious.

“From the outset until the conclusion of the judicial decree, presidential appointments were in effect… and a method was prescribed and duly followed. Evidently, the underlying purpose of this decree (2023) was to prod the Parliament into legislative action. The prerogative of delineating the nature of the legislation rests with the Parliament… it is erroneous to suggest that elections were not conducted previously…,” Justice Khanna remarked.

The bench cautioned Bhushan that since 1950, numerous appointments of election commissioners had been made, and acceding to the petitioners’ contentions would precipitate disorder, especially considering the impending elections.

Emphasizing that there were no allegations against the government-appointed election commissioners, the bench rebuffed Bhushan’s plea for the apex court to direct a panel headed by the Chief Justice of India to convene and nominate individuals, asserting that the existing system sufficed.

The bench underscored that the constitutional bench’s decree in 2023 did not stipulate the inclusion of a judicial member on the selection committee in the new legislation to be enacted by Parliament, and refuted Bhushan’s insinuation that the election commission was subservient to the executive.

Furthermore, the apex court declined to suspend the 2023 statute, which introduced a fresh framework for appointing members of the election commission, and censured the central government for expediting the appointments.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, elucidated that the 2023 decree explicitly mandated Parliament to enact legislation for the appointment of election commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner. Mehta expounded that the process for selecting the election commissioners commenced subsequent to the enactment of the statute.

The bench noted that the Centre furnished the selection committee with a roster of candidates for the appointment of election commissioners on March 14. Questioning the expeditiousness of the process, the bench queried why the Centre had only allotted a mere six candidates out of 200 for the position of election commissioners and contended that the selection committee should have been afforded additional time to deliberate. Criticizing the Centre’s haste, the bench probed Mehta as to why the leader of the Opposition was not granted an extension when soliciting more time for consideration of candidates.