Can We Direct Parliament? Top Court On Panel To Pick Poll Body Chief

The hearing continued into the following day, with the bench refusing to adjourn and noting that the case remains a priority.

A bench including Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma heard petitions challenging the 2023 Act. The petitioners argued the Act gives primacy to the executive and undermines the independence of the Election Commission. The respondents argued the Parliament has the prerogative to frame law. The bench stated it is Parliament's job to enact a law, and courts cannot compel Parliament to do so. The Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested that the case be kept for next week due to the Sabarimala reference case before another nine-judge bench, but the court refused to adjourn, calling the case more important than others.

The top court declined to put on hold the appointments of two Election Commissioners under the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

The Supreme Court issued a verdict that the appointment of Election Commissioners should be done on the advice of a committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, and the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha until Parliament passes a law.

The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, was enacted, removing the Chief Justice of India from the selection panel for appointing the CEC and ECs.