New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to pass any interim order suspending Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over allegations that he took decisions unilaterally in the Election Commission of India without the concurrence of the two other Election Commissioners.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant issued notice to the Election Commission seeking its response to the allegations raised in the petition. The court indicated that it could reconsider or recall decisions if, after examining the ECI's response, it finds that they were taken without the required unanimity.

“After notice, if they come and show that ABC decisions were taken without unanimity, we will take those decisions back” the court said.

The bench was hearing a plea challenging decisions, guidelines and software changes allegedly made by CEC Gyanesh Kumar without the concurrence of Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.

Also read | Kerala Vigilance to file FIR against CEC Gyanesh Kumar in reopened 20-yr-old KSTP graft case

The petitioners have alleged that Kumar has been exercising powers that legally belong to the Election Commission as a whole and have questioned whether decisions were taken collectively as required under law.

The Supreme Court had earlier sought records of the decisions under challenge, including the controversial changes to Form 6, the form used for voter registration.

The court had said it wanted to ascertain whether such decisions were taken solely by Kumar or approved unanimously or by a majority of the three-member poll panel.

“When the record is produced, we want to see who has modified Form 6,” Chief Justice Surya Kant had said.

Also read | ‘Intrinsically arbitrary’: Justice Bhuyan’s remarks trigger fresh Congress attack on Gyanesh Kumar

The petitions also allege that changes relating to ancestral details and links with the previous Special Intensive Revision (SIR) were introduced through the ECI's software without following the statutory procedure required to amend the prescribed form.

The pleas have further raised questions over the handling of electoral roll revisions in Goa and West Bengal and alleged that some decisions were taken without the knowledge or approval of the other election commissioners.

Also read | ‘How many people will you arrest?’ CJP vows nationwide protests on Oct 10 despite arrest threats

The petitioners have sought action against Kumar, including suspension pending the final hearing, arguing that such a step was necessary to preserve the "multi-member character of the Election Commission."

The Election Commission has maintained that differences of opinion and observations are a normal part of deliberations in any institution and that its orders carry full legal sanction and follow established statutory procedures.