Election Commission chief Gyanesh Kumar and ECs Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi met amid reports of differences, saying SIR decisions were unanimous while clarifying Form 6, ECINet, electoral-roll revision and internal administrative communications.
Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi met at the Election Commission headquarters on Saturday, their first reported meeting after media reports highlighted objections allegedly raised by the two commissioners over decisions linked to the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The meeting, held at 3 pm, was followed by a detailed statement from the Election Commission of India (ECI) covering the SIR process, ECINet, Form 6, claims and objections, and questions surrounding internal communications involving the Cabinet Secretary. The Commission said all SIR orders were issued with the approval of all three Election Commissioners and described the final decisions as unanimous.
The development came days after a media investigation reported that Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections on several occasions concerning electoral-roll management and decisions connected with SIR. The report triggered political reactions, with opposition parties questioning the functioning of the poll panel and demanding action against the Chief Election Commissioner. The Election Commission, however, has maintained that differing views and observations during internal deliberations are part of institutional decision-making and do not mean that final Commission decisions lacked unanimity.
Election Commission Says SIR Orders Had Unanimous Approval
In its latest statement, the Election Commission said the SIR order issued on June 24, 2025, covering all states and Union Territories and beginning with Bihar, was issued with the unanimous approval of the Commission. The process was subsequently extended to West Bengal and other states and Union Territories in phases.
The Commission also referred to the Supreme Court’s May 27, 2026 order while stating that the SIR process had received judicial consideration. It said schedules for SIR covering 12 states and Union Territories were issued on October 27, 2025, while another schedule covering 19 states and Union Territories was issued on May 14, 2026, with unanimous approval from the Commission.
According to the ECI, the final number of electors under the broader exercise will become clear only after the final publication of electoral rolls in the remaining states and Union Territories covered under Phase III.
The Commission’s position is that the existence of internal observations or queries should not be interpreted as evidence that the final decisions of the three-member body were divided. In an earlier response, the ECI said internal notes, suggestions and differing views were part of its standard decision-making process and that its final decisions carried legal sanction and followed statutory procedures.
Form 6 Changes and Electoral Roll Inclusion
The Election Commission also addressed questions concerning Form 6, the form used for inclusion of names in electoral rolls.
The Commission said the declaration attached to Form 6 for the SIR process had been upheld by the Supreme Court. It clarified that outside the SIR period, the forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, would continue to apply.
The clarification comes amid reports that changes relating to Form 6 had been among the issues discussed internally by Election Commissioners. Media reports had also raised questions about procedures surrounding voter registration, deletion and access to electoral databases.
The ECI said the procedures governing electoral-roll revision would continue under the applicable legal and administrative framework.
Clarification Over Letters to Cabinet Secretary
The Commission also responded to questions surrounding letters sent by Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi to the Cabinet Secretary.
According to the ECI statement, the letters were not connected to any policy decision of the Commission or its IT division. Instead, the Commission said they related to the working of an officer on deputation to the poll panel.
The ECI further stated that work redistribution orders issued by the officer concerned were not implemented after directions from the two Election Commissioners. It also said that supervision of the IT division by the Deputy Election Commissioner was never withdrawn.
The clarification was issued as part of the Commission’s broader response to questions over internal administrative functioning.
New Directions for Election Commission Meetings
The Election Commission also announced procedural measures concerning its meetings.
It said agendas for Commission meetings would be circulated in advance and minutes would subsequently be issued. The poll body further maintained that directions issued by Election Commissioners to officers would be followed meticulously.
The measures come amid increased public attention on the internal functioning of the three-member Commission following reports of differences over certain administrative and electoral-roll decisions.
The ECI has repeatedly maintained that discussions, observations and disagreements during the drafting or deliberation stage can form part of the functioning of a multi-member institution. At the same time, it has asserted that the final decisions taken by the Commission were unanimous.
Relief Measures for Electors During SIR
The latest statement also contained directions concerning people who receive notices during the ongoing SIR because they have been classified as unmapped or have logical discrepancies in their electoral records.
The Election Commission said Booth Level Officers (BLOs) would visit the homes of such persons to collect the necessary documents. The documents would then be uploaded on ECINet for consideration by the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO).
The Commission said such individuals would not ordinarily need to appear personally before the ERO or Assistant Electoral Registration Officer (AERO) for a hearing.
Only in exceptional circumstances, as determined by the ERO, would a hearing be conducted. The ECI said such hearings should preferably be held online and added that facilities for online hearings would be strengthened.
The Commission also said an adult member of a family could be authorised by an elector to attend a hearing on the elector’s behalf, where required.
Help Desks and Special Camps
The ECI directed District Election Officers to establish an adequate number of help desks and organise special camps according to local requirements.
The facilities are intended particularly for people living in night shelters, labourers, poor and homeless citizens and other groups who may face difficulties in completing the SIR-related process.
The directions are part of the Commission’s stated effort to provide assistance during the electoral-roll revision exercise and facilitate the submission of documents and resolution of discrepancies.
Political Reactions Follow Media Report
The latest meeting and statement followed a political controversy triggered by a media report alleging that Sandhu and Joshi had objected multiple times to decisions and orders connected with electoral-roll management and SIR.
The Indian Express reported that the two commissioners had raised objections on at least 14 occasions over a 10-month period. The reported issues included voter registration and deletion, changes to Form 6, voter database-related matters and aspects of the SIR process.
Opposition leaders subsequently criticised the functioning of the Election Commission and called for action against the CEC, while the BJP defended the Commission’s decision-making process. The BJP has argued that the existence of internal deliberations and differing views can be part of institutional functioning.
| Also Read: Education gap between cities and villages reduced significantly: CM |
The Election Commission, for its part, has rejected the interpretation that the reported internal observations represented a breakdown within the poll panel. It has said that differences during deliberations are normal and that the final decisions, including those concerning SIR, were unanimous.
| Also Read: Tripura Left Front protests against EC, seeks CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s removal |
The latest meeting between Gyanesh Kumar, Sandhu and Joshi and the subsequent detailed statement therefore place the Commission’s position on record: internal observations may arise during deliberations, but the ECI maintains that its final SIR decisions were approved unanimously by all three Election Commissioners.
