What could happen next in Chief Election Commissioner law case after Supreme Court split verdict?
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to examine an application seeking recall of its September 23 split verdict on the 2023 law governing the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners.
The Supreme Court’s next step could determine the course of the challenge to the 2023 CEC appointments law. The CJI may decide whether the recall application is maintainable and whether the September 23 split verdict should be reconsidered. Depending on the court’s decision, the matter could either proceed on the basis of the existing split verdict or be placed before an appropriate larger bench for further consideration. A separate curative petition filed by another party could also follow its own legal process.
What happened
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan mentioned the recall application before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. The CJI said the court would examine the application before deciding whether to take it up.
The application seeks recall of the September 23 verdict delivered by a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma. The two judges gave divergent views on whether challenges to the 2023 law should be referred to a larger Constitution Bench.
Justice Datta held that a larger-bench reference was not necessary, while Justice Sharma favoured such a reference. The split meant that the issue had to be placed before the CJI for administrative consideration of the constitution of an appropriate bench.
What the recall plea says
Sankaranarayanan clarified that the application is an interlocutory application seeking recall of the September 23 judgment. According to reports, the plea has raised a concern regarding a possible apprehension of bias involving Justice Sharma, citing the fact that his son is a standing counsel for the Election Commission of India.
The senior counsel also informed the bench that another party had filed a curative petition against the split verdict. He said the curative petition would follow its own legal process, while the present application specifically seeks recall of the judgment.
Why the case matters
The underlying dispute concerns the 2023 law that changed the composition of the selection panel for appointing the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners. The law excludes the Chief Justice of India from the panel.
The petitions challenging the law have raised questions about the independence of the Election Commission and the framework governing appointments to its top positions. The Supreme Court's decision on the bench strength and the maintainability of the challenges could therefore have implications for how the appointment mechanism is examined constitutionally.
Analysis
The September 23 split verdict did not finally resolve whether the challenge to the 2023 appointment law should be considered by a larger Constitution Bench. The recall application adds another procedural layer to the case, while the separate curative petition represents a different legal route.
The immediate question before the CJI is whether the recall application should be entertained. If the application is taken up, the court would have to consider the grounds raised against the earlier judgment before determining the next course of proceedings.
The broader constitutional issue remains the validity of the appointment framework introduced by the 2023 law and whether excluding the CJI from the selection panel affects the institutional independence of the Election Commission.