Supreme Court Adjourns Pleas Alleging Unilateral ECI Decisions

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 27 October 2026

Case: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, Justice Manoj Misra
Decided: 12 February 2024
Statutes: Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023
Source: LiveLaw

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India, the Supreme Court, comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, adjourned petitions alleging unilateral decisions by the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding appointments of Election Commissioners. The Court stated it would examine the matter, noting the petitions were filed before the new law came into effect.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

The Supreme Court will examine petitions concerning the appointment process of Election Commissioners, particularly those filed prior to the enactment of new legislation governing such appointments.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates should note that the Supreme Court is actively considering the legality of ECI appointments, especially those made under the previous regime. Litigants challenging ECI decisions may find their arguments strengthened if the Court finds issues with the appointment process. Counsel should be prepared to address the impact of new legislation on pending challenges.

Key Legal Takeaways

1The Supreme Court is examining petitions challenging the appointment process of Election Commissioners.
2The petitions were filed before the new Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, came into force.
3The Court has adjourned the matter for further consideration.

The Legal Issue On February 12, 2024, the Supreme Court of India, presided over by CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, heard a batch of petitions challenging the appointment process of Election Commissioners. The petitioners, including Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, alleged that the Election Commission of India (ECI) was making unilateral decisions regarding appointments. The core of the challenge revolved around the composition of the selection committee for Election Commissioners, particularly in light of the then-newly enacted Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.

Court's Reasoning The Supreme Court acknowledged the petitions and noted that they were filed prior to the new Act coming into effect. The bench stated, "We will examine it." This indicates the Court's intent to delve into the merits of the allegations concerning the appointment process, considering the legal framework that existed at the time the petitions were filed and the subsequent legislative changes. The Court did not issue any substantive orders on the day but indicated that the matter warranted further scrutiny.

What Follows The Supreme Court has adjourned the pleas for further consideration. This means the petitioners will have an opportunity to present their arguments regarding the alleged unilateral decisions by the ECI and the validity of the appointment process under the relevant legal provisions. The Union of India and the ECI will also have the opportunity to respond. The outcome of these proceedings could have implications for the future appointment of Election Commissioners and the interpretation of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.