SC refuses to adjourn hearings on 2023 EC appointments law, calls matter 'more important than any other'

Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma refused Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's request to adjourn petitions challenging the 2023 law on the appointment of Election Commissioners. The court said the matter is 'more important than any other matter' and allowed the petitioners to commence arguments, directing submissions to be wrapped up by Thursday, with the Centre to be heard subsequently. The petitions challenge the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which alters the selection panel by removing the Chief Justice of India and adding a union minister nominated by the Prime Minister. The bench raised a constitutional question on whether it can direct Parliament to enact a law governing EC appointments, questioning the maintainability of such a prayer. It referred to the March 2, 2023 Anoop Baranwal ruling, which described a temporary three-member selection committee (Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition, and CJI) to operate until Parliament enacted a law. The Centre argued that EC autonomy does not depend on a judicial member in the panel, while petitioners warned against executive dominance in appointments.

The Centre argued that the appointment of two Election Commissioners in March 2024 was not rushed to pre-empt judicial scrutiny, and that the process followed the provisions of the 2023 law.

In Anoop Baranwal, a Constitution bench prescribed a three-member selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India as an interim mechanism until Parliament enacted a law. The ruling was intended as a temporary measure to address a constitutional vacuum.