CEC law meets the Supreme Court’s five-judge waiting room
A split verdict sends the appointment-law challenge to CJI Surya Kant for possible Constitution Bench consideration. The law itself remains untouched—for now.
The challenge to the 2023 appointment law awaits the next constitutional step.
The Supreme Court has split over whether the challenge to the 2023 law governing appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners should go to a Constitution Bench. The law replaces the Chief Justice of India on the selection panel with a Union Cabinet minister nominated by the Prime Minister. Parliamentary drafting, now doing rather a lot of constitutional work, lists the panel as the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition and that nominated minister. [1][2]
Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma disagreed on the reference question. Justice Datta rejected the Union government’s request for a larger bench; Justice Sharma held that the case raised a substantial constitutional question. Both agreed that the papers should go to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant to consider constituting a Constitution Bench, rather than being sent first to another three-judge bench. [1][3]
That is a procedural step, not a verdict on the law. The CJI has not, on the material available, formally constituted the final bench, and the Supreme Court has neither struck down nor upheld the Act. The BJP-led Union government has secured no victory here—only another appointment with constitutional scrutiny. The court’s concern about delays in forming Constitution Benches is now part of the record. [1][3]