Opposition demands removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar after internal dissent over voter-roll SIR

# What happened Two Election Commissioners in India—Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi—have formally objected multiple times to decisions taken during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voters' list. According to reporting cited in Greater Kashmir, the two commissioners flagged issues at least 14 times over the last 10 months, including four objections lodged on a single day.

# The substance of the objections

# Political reaction Opposition leaders responded sharply. Congress leaders used the report to accuse Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar of concentrating power and undermining the Election Commission of India (ECI). Specific demands and accusations reported include:

• K C Venugopal: demanded Kumar's removal and an impartial, Supreme Court-monitored probe, saying the CEC has "no right to remain in office."

• Pawan Khera: called Kumar "planted" and accused him of disenfranchising crores of voters.
• Manish Tewari: said if the reported facts are correct, actions may have been arbitrary and could warrant impeachment proceedings.
• Kapil Sibal: demanded suspension of the CEC and filing of an FIR.

# Legal and institutional concerns Former chief election commissioner O P Rawat called changes to Form 6 "absolutely wrong and illegal," and described the internal differences as "very serious" and "unfortunate." Observers and opposition politicians pointed to potential violations of procedure: they argued that if Commission decisions were taken without majority consensus, those decisions could be illegal or arbitrary.

# Election Commission response reported elsewhere The ECI has responded in public statements reported by other outlets that its actions, including the SIR, were unanimous and done in accordance with law. The Greater Kashmir piece and related reporting focus primarily on the internal objections and the political fallout.

# Why this matters

# Immediate developments to watch

• Formal action in Parliament regarding removal or impeachment motions.
• Any Supreme Court involvement or a court-monitored inquiry if demanded and accepted.
• Official release of internal records or minutes clarifying whether decisions were unanimous or took place without full commissioner agreement.
• ECI's further public statements addressing the specific objections recorded by Sandhu and Joshi.