The Bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta said the petitions challenging the 2023 law on appointment of Election Commissioners would proceed, observing that the matter was “more important than any other matter.”
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, refused the Union Government’s request to defer the hearing in petitions challenging the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
A two-judge Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma was hearing the matter.
Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta sought an adjournment. He submitted that he was engaged before the nine-judge Bench hearing the Sabarimala reference.
Justice Datta Says Present Matter Requires Priority
Justice Datta referred to remarks reportedly made by the nine-judge Bench on the previous day.
Those remarks concerned the maintainability of the PIL seeking entry of women into the Sabarimala temple.
Justice Datta indicated that the present challenge required priority.
He observed that the Sabarimala reference arose from a PIL which, according to the reported observation, should not have been entertained.
Petitioners Asked To Begin Arguments
The Solicitor General repeated his request for adjournment.
However, the Bench refused to defer the hearing.
The Court said the petitioners could begin their submissions on Wednesday.
It also said the Union could advance its arguments on another date.
The Bench asked the petitioners to complete their submissions by Thursday.
Challenge To Election Commissioners’ Act, 2023
The petitions have been filed by Dr. Jaya Thakur, Association for Democratic Reforms, Lok Prahari and others.
They challenge the Election Commissioners’ Act, 2023, which Parliament passed in December 2023.
The law came a few months after the Supreme Court’s March 2023 ruling on appointment of Election Commissioners.
In that judgment, the Supreme Court said Election Commissioners should be appointed by a panel comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition and the Chief Justice of India.
The Court had said this arrangement would continue until Parliament enacted a law on the subject.
The purpose of the direction was to ensure an independent appointment process. The Court also sought to reduce executive influence in the selection of Election Commissioners.
Petitioners Object To New Selection Committee
Under the 2023 Act, a committee selects Election Commissioners.
The committee consists of the Prime Minister, a Union Cabinet Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition.
If there is no recognised Leader of the Opposition, the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha becomes a member.
The petitioners argue that this mechanism does not ensure independence.
They contend that the new law goes against the spirit of the Supreme Court’s earlier judgment.
According to them, the exclusion of the Chief Justice of India weakens the safeguards in the appointment process.
CJI Surya Kant Had Earlier Recused
In March 2026, CJI Surya Kant recused from the hearing.
The petitioners have challenged the exclusion of the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel.
The CJI had observed that the matter should go before a Bench that does not include either the CJI or any future CJI.
The petitioners have now commenced their arguments.
Case Details
Case Title: Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India and connected cases
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 14/2024, Diary No. 146/2024 and connected cases
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
Key Law: Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023
