AMID growing calls for the resignation of India’s top election official Gyanesh Kumar for alleged voter roll manipulation, a key issue has come to the fore: the process of the chief election commissioner’s appointment, resignation and termination. The campaign to remove Gyanesh Kumar from office began after a newspaper report alleged that he was responsible for removing the names of 130 million voters from India’s electoral rolls — a figure slightly higher than Bangladesh’s entire voting population.
While the Congress Party, India’s “cockroach” youth movement and others demand Kumar’s resignation, which is simple enough, Kumar’s removal from office is a lengthy and complicated affair, similar to the removal of a Supreme Court judge.
Article 324 of the Indian constitution, which deals with the Election Commission, outlines the procedures for removal of the election chief. Article 324 (5) stipulates that the top election official shall not be removed from office “except in like manner and on the like grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court”.
In India, the CEC is appointed under the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. The CEC is appointed by the president.
The law stipulates that people who are serving or have served in positions equivalent to a secretary to the Indian government will be eligible. They also have to be “persons of integrity, who have knowledge of and experience in management and conduct of elections”. A search committee, led by the law minister, compiles a panel of five persons for consideration of the selection committee.
The election chief and commissioners are subsequently appointed by the president upon the recommendation of this selection committee, which currently consists of the prime minister, who serves as the chair, along with the leader of opposition in Lok Sabha and a minister as nominated by the prime minister.
The law governing their appointment, however, witnessed a significant change in 2023 where the constitution of the selection committee was changed. Earlier, the selection panel consisted of the prime minister, opposition leader and chief justice of India. The top judge was replaced by a union cabinet minister, for which Narendra Modi chose his home minister, Amit Shah.
Critics argue that this change increases executive influence over the appointment process, as two of the three members of the selection committee would be from the ruling party. As for resigning from office, it is a simple procedure where the election chief or any of the commissioners “may, at any time, by writing under his hand addressed to the president, resign his office”.
Removal
The election chief’s removal follows a quasi-judicial procedure in line with the procedure stipulated by the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968. Supreme Court and High Court judges can be removed on two grounds — proven misbehaviour and incapacity. A written notice must be signed by at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha. The Lok Sabha Speaker or Rajya Sabha Chair examines the notice and available information, and decides to admit or refuse the motion.
If admitted, a committee is convened with one Supreme Court judge, one High Court judge and one distinguished legal expert. The election chief will have the right to defend against the allegation as the committee investigates. If the committee concludes that the charges are not proved, the motion is dropped, and the process ends.
If the committee finds that allegations are true, the report is submitted to the parliament. The motion to remove the election chief will have to carry a special majority (two-thirds of voters present and voting) in both houses, in order to pass. If the motion passes both houses, a formal address is presented to the president, who issues the official order of removal.
The election chief, Gyanesh Kumar has denied accusations of manipulating the voter list during an exercise to verify India’s one billion voters.
Published in Dawn, October 16th, 2026