Election Commission Rift: Two Commissioners Flag 'Illegal' Changes to Voter Registration Forms by Chief Gyanesh Kumar

An unprecedented rift has erupted within the highest echelons of India’s poll body, with Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi formally recording at least 14 objections over the past 10 months against steps taken under Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

As per a report by the Indian Express, the dissenting commissioners warned that crucial decisions ranging from altering voter registration forms to adding and deleting names from electoral rolls, were carried out without their knowledge or approval, terming several moves “unauthorised and illegal”.

The internal fallout centres heavily around the execution of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) affecting 13 crore voter names, alongside growing concerns regarding the "gradual centralisation" of electoral roll software systems like ECINet and ERONet, the report noted.

Statutory Safeguards Bypassed and Form 6 Alterations

The dissent highlights major procedural violations concerning Form 6—the mandatory legal application used by new voters to register. Both Sandhu and Joshi reportedly noted that Form 6 is embedded in the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and cannot be modified without formal government notification.

Despite their recorded objections in May, an altered version asking applicants whether their parents or grandparents existed in past revision rolls appeared on the poll panel’s digital portal, as per the report.

Sandhu subsequently wrote to senior officials demanding the immediate removal of these "unauthorised" changes to prevent the disenfranchisement of first-time voters.

Key issues reportedly flagged by the dissenting commissioners include:

• Bypassing Statutory Officers: Centralised IT controls effectively curtailed the authority of local Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs).

• Unauthorised Form Changes: Modifications to voter registration forms were pushed online without required Law Ministry approval or internal unanimity.

• Lack of Transparency: Key software updates and roll revision decisions were executed without bringing files before the full Commission.

• Systemic Glitches: Centralised digital overrides led to software failures, including the disenfranchisement of 97 eligible voters in Goa despite Supreme Court directives.

Escalation to the Cabinet Secretary

Tensions escalated further after a work allocation order removed established oversight layers governing the IT division.

In a move without precedent in the history of the constitutional body, both Sandhu and Joshi individually wrote to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan, reporting the administrative order as a direct violation of the law governing the Election Commission and demanding corrective action.

The ongoing standoff underscores severe friction over the legal requirement that business within the three-member Election Commission be transacted with full transparency and consensus.