CEC Appointment: SC reserved the decision on making the appointment of Election Commissioners transparent, what happened in the court today?

Posted on 24th Nov 2022 by rohit kumar

CEC Appointment: The Supreme Court has reserved its decision on the demand to bring more transparency in the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and 2 Election Commissioners. It has been demanded in the petition that the Chief Justice, PM, and Leader of the Opposition should be selected by the Election Commissioner. Direct appointment to this big constitutional post by the government is not right.

 

A constitution bench of 5 judges headed by Justice KM Joseph heard the case for 4 days. The remaining 4 members of the bench are Justices Ajay Rastogi, Hrishikesh Roy, Aniruddha Bose, and CT Ravikumar. At the end of the hearing, the bench asked all the parties to write their arguments in brief and submit them to the court within 5 days.

 

be fair and strong CEC

During the hearing, the court said, "The person sitting on the post of Chief Election Commissioner should be such, who can do his work without being influenced by anyone. If there is any allegation against the Prime Minister, then the CEC can fulfill its responsibility firmly. Election Commissioner Involvement of the Chief Justice in the selection process will ensure that a fair and strong person reaches this important constitutional post."

 

Remembered TN Seshan

The 5-judge bench also recalled TN Seshan, the 10th Chief Election Commissioner of India. Seshan, who was the CEC between 1990 and 1996, is known to have made major reforms in the election process by taking tough decisions. The judges said, "There have been many CECs in the country, but there are very few like Seshan".

 

Why not 6 years tenure?

The court also questioned the fact that since 2004, no Chief Election Commissioner has had a tenure of 6 years, whereas the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioners (Conditions of Service) Act, 1991 prescribed the term of the CEC to be 6 years. Says the thing. This is happening because the retirement age of CEC is 65 years. By the time someone reaches this position, there are less than 6 years left to reach the retirement age.

 

Question on the appointment of Arun Goyal

The Supreme Court had asked the Central Government to present the file related to the election of Election Commissioner Arun Goyal, who was appointed on 19 November. Seeing this, the court asked many tough questions. The judges said, "The post was vacant since May 15. Suddenly, in less than 24 hours, the entire process from sending names to approval was completed. What happened between May 15 and November 18?"

 

The court also asked, "The Law Minister sent 4 names. The question is also why these 4 names were sent. Is it not that only the names of the people liked by the government were sent? Then the most junior officer How was he selected? The officer about to retire took VRS before joining this post. Is it just a coincidence?"

 

small things should not be reviewed

Responding to the court's questions, Attorney General R Venkataramani said, "Nothing went wrong in the appointment process. Earlier also appointments were made in 12 to 24 hours. The 4 names sent were taken from the Department of Personnel (DoPT) database." It is publicly available. Seniority, retirement, age, etc. are taken care of while taking names. It is a complete system. At the time of selection for the post, the seniority of the officer is not determined by his date of birth, it is seen to which batch the officer belongs.

 

we are not against the government

The chairman of the bench, Justice Joseph, assured the attorney general, "We are just trying to understand the process. Don't think that the court has made up its mind against you, nor are we questioning the qualification of the officer just elected." ." The Attorney General once again said, "The Court should not interfere merely based on apprehensions of the petitioner. Nothing has happened to say that the Election Commission is not functioning properly".

 

petitioner's argument

Prashant Bhushan, counsel for petitioner Anoop Baranwal, said, "Even if we talk about the 1985 batch, more than 150 people were available. There are many of them who, if selected, would have held the post longer than Arun Goel. Only the government should not have the right to select important posts.

 

Gopal Sankaranarayanan, another senior counsel appearing for the petitioner side, said, "Why only 59-60 years old officers are being sent to the Election Commission? Why not 50-52 years old? This will allow them to spend full time in the commission. Retire at the age of 65. Before being appointed, he will also be able to get a tenure of 6 years as the Chief Election Commissioner.

 

there are more demands

A total of 4 petitions were heard in the case. Apart from the appointment of the Election Commissioner, demands have also been raised that the Election Commission should be empowered to make rules related to elections, it should have a separate secretariat, and the budget of the Election Commission should be kept separately. Other Election Commissioners should also get constitutional protection like the Chief Election Commissioner. However, there was not much discussion on these issues during the hearing.

 

Also Read: Gujarat: Gujarat High Court's big decision after the Morbi accident, ordered to survey of all the bridges in the state